Fresno Criminal Defense Attorney | Fresno DUI Attorney Serving all of California

Call for a free case evaluation.
Push Here

Contact Us

Send us a quick email

Please type your full name.
Invalid email address.
Invalid Input
Invalid Input
Enter Code
Invalid Input

If you have been registering as a sex offender and want to stop there are several ways this could happen.   I have been helping people with these type of problems for more than 13 years.  As a former probation officer, and deputy district attorney I know the ins and outs of the system.


1. Hofshier motion.  Certain crimes used to be mandatory sex registration for life.  Now these crimes are discretionary.  You can stop your registration requirment by filing for Hofsheir relief. 


2. Seek a certificate of Rehabilitation.  After a period of successful registration usually but not automatically 10 years, you can file for a Certificate of Rehabilitation, and ask that the registration requirement be lifted.  If granted your obligation to register as a sex offender will be lifted.  And as part of the process the request will go to the governors office for request for a pardon.

3. Request for a Pardon   Seek a Pardon from the Governor.  The number of Pardons granted by a Governor of course, varies from one Governor to another.  However, Governor Brown has granted more than 450 pardons in his time in office. 


4.  Overturn the conviction    if you overturn on appeal the conviction which caused the regristration than your requirement to register will stop.  If your plea of guilty to the underlying charge ( or guilty verdict at trial) was in error you, we may be able to help you set aside the verdict and stop the 290 sex registration. 


Give me a call if you have any questions I have been helping people with these type of problems for many years and have had success in trial.  This success includes acquitalls in two different multiple count sex crime cases. 

Every case is different give me a call and we can sit down for a case evaluations to see what your options are and whether any of the above named issues will help you.




If you are being charged with a crime and someone has recorded a phone call or a conversation with you the law in that type of case can be very complicated.  As an Attorney with more than 13 years of experience, and someone that has dealt with this type of police action on many occassions, the short answer is yes the person can record if they are acting in conjunction with the police when they recorded.




However, there are many exceptions to this general rule that I will go over below.



A pretext phone call is a tactic often used by Law Enforcement.  The person will call you with a phone or recording equipment provided by Law Enforcement.  For example in sexual assault cases.  Police will often give equipment to the alleged victim when they do not have much evidence or want to bolster there case.  

The alleged victim may call the person that allegedly sexually assualted them under the pretext of wanting to know why the incident happened.  Any and all statements made by the alleged defendant can and will be used against him.

The reason for this is that if the person is acting at the behest or direction of law enforcement than the general rule does not apply.


The result will be the same.  In fact we had a case where a person wore a wire while meeting with our client.  Our client made admissions to the effect that he was sorry and other specifics implicating him in the offense.  We filed a motion to have the conversations not allowed as a violation of our clients Fourth Amendment rights.  The Motion was denied. 

Usually these type of conversations must be done at the investigation stage, of the process.  In other words before initialization of criminal proceedings.  If these are done later they could be suppressed during a motion to suppress hearing. 

Usually the police will do this before they make arrest, or file charges.  Once charges are filed and a person has a right to an Attorney the communications are more likely to be kept out of court. 

However, Jail call and letters and other communications initiated by the defendant are not part of this process.  In other words your words made during a Jail phone call as discussed below can and will be used against you.  





Courts have held almost unanimously that there is no expectation of privacy in communications from a Corrections facility.  In fact, if you use the phones usually there will be a warning that all calls are recorded.  I don't even like talking specifically about cases with clients from Jail.  The reason is I believe that all calls from Jail are recorded.  Even though calls to an Attorney are recorded.  This is not a certainty but why take a chance on confidential communication being overheard by the wrong person?


Again, as a general rule those communication will be admitted to prove your guilt.  


NO.  Sometimes people say things just to get others off there back.  It could be a case where someoen after being called several times actually says OK I did it.   Sometimes ther Jury will not believe such statements.  As they may believe they were only said to stop the call from alleged victims. There should be something to back that statement up such as facts of excactly how you did the crime. 


If you have this issue in your case go ahead and call to get advice.  


Many times people are wrongfully arrested for everything up to and including Murder when they were simply defending themselves.  If you are charged with Assualt, Battery, or Homicide, it is important that you obtain experienced Criminal Defense Trial Counsel.  With many Felony Trials under my belt and excellent outcomes I have the experience to heldp you.  If you hire defense counsel for a defense such as Self Defense, you must have EXPERIENCED  defense counsel not just an Attorney that has been an Attorney for many years, one who actually does a lot of trial work is needed.


As for Self Defense the law of Self Defense is complex, lets start with Self Defense for a Homicide.


There are actually two kinds of Self Defense for Homicide, which is actually two defenses both of which I went into on my Homicide article, but want to go further into here. 

The two defenses are Self Defense and Imperfect Self Defense



Self Defense is someone 1. Actually believes in the need to use deadly force and 2. That belief was Resonable.

Lets break those down

An Example of Actual belief in the need to use deadly force would be if someone walks outside and you know that the person does not like you and is known  to have weapons.

You can testify that you actually believed in the need to use deadly force. 


If the before mentioned person came outside and you knew he did not like you and he suddenly turns and pulls a gun, you have your own gun and shoot him dead. 

Because ther other person pulled a gun first a reasonable person would be in fear for there life and this would supply a complete defense to the crime of Murder.


Now lets say under the same circumstances the person above comes outside and you know he hates you and he turns to you and you believe he is coming to kill you and you honestly believe that, but your assumption is wrong and the person is not armed and you shoot and kill him. 

you had an Unreasonable belief in the need to use deadly force and therefore, you would not be guilty of First or Second Degree Murder, but instead, Manslaughter. 

Let's look at this a little closer.

For both Self Defense and Imperfect Self Defense the first Element is the same

An Actual Belief in the need to use deadly force

If that belief is reasonable then the defense is complete and you could be found not guilty.

If you belief was unreasonable then the crime would be Mansaughter.

This unreasonable belief can reduce a First Degree Murder to Second Degree and Second Degree Murder to Manslaugher.

That is becuase you are not acting out of deliberation and premiditation, you are acting out of the unreasonable belief in the need to use deadly force.

And you are not acting out of Malice, which is needed for second degree murder because you are acting out of the unreasonable belief in the need to use deadly force, not with intent to kil. 

Now this unreasonable self defense is not available for example a Battery charge.

For a charge of Battery you must use reasonable force to protect yourself or someone else from force.

And you must only use the amount of force necessary to protect yourself. 

Many cases will involve self defense during a mutual combat situation, or when the original aggressor becomes the victim.  this is beause the person that was originally attacked used unreasonable force in protecting himself.  The person protecting himself cannot after having defended himself proceed to beat the person that attacked him unconscious for example.


If you have been charged with a Battery or a Homicide, please give us a call so we can held you out.





The answer to that question is complex, depending on whether there is a warrant for your arrest, and if there is exigent circumstances.  If you have been arrested you need experienced criminal defense help.  As an Adunct Criminology Instructor, former Probation Officer, and an Attorney with more than 13 years of criminal defense experience I can help you with your criminal defense questions.

In most circumstances the police need a warrant to enter  your home even if they have a warrant for  your arrest.  However, there is several exceptions to this.



If the police are in hot pursuet of a person suspected of a Felon the police may follow the person into the home to make an arrest.  They may even break a door or a window in order to gain access to the home, however, the police must be acting reasonably.

Also, threre is what is commonly referred to as the plain veiw doctrine which states that if the police have a legal right to be in the place where they are standing and if there  is something within plain view meaning they don't have to conduct an investigation to ascertain if it is illegal, they may seize that item. 




Exigent circumstances means an emergency.  The destrution of evidence.  Or the person may be arming themselves with a weapon, or someoene may be in danger the police may enter the home to deal with the emergency. 



This is a section of law  I often see Attorneys, deal with completely wrong, and is sometimes reaises complicated issues of law.

California Penal Code section 844 states "to make an arrest, a private person, if the offense is a Felony, and in all cases a Peace Officer, may break open the door or window of the house in which the person to be arrested is, or in which they have reasonable grounds for believing the person to be, after having demanded admittance and explained the purpose for wich admittance is desired.  (CA Penal Code 844)

The meaning of this statute is that the Police to make an arrest for a Felony may break a door or a window to arrest a person if they have reasonable grounds to believe the person is in the home However, they must first knock and announce there presence and demand the person come to the door wait for him and then enter to arrest the person.


Knock and announce

This knocking and announcing is what is currently referred to as knock and announce. 


The courts in decisions like people v jacobs have held that the police must have reasonable grounds to believe the person to be arrested is currently in the home.  Not that he lives there and might be home. 

The court willl look at factors such as did the officers see the person enter the home

did a neighbor see the person go inside

did the person see police and run inside

was the person to be arrested have his car outside

in Jacobs the police simply believed that the person to be arrested was inside because he was not at work the police entered the home and seized evidence that was illegal.  The court held that this was an illegal entry because the police had no ability to know if the person to be arrested was currently in the home. 

If the police illegally enter a home all evidence observed inside the home is illegally obtained.  Under what is called the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine and the evidence would be suppressed.


If you or a loved one has been arrested inside your home without a warrant call us so we can help you.   

Vehicle Code 23109(c) VC "exhibition of speed"--also known as "speed ex"--is a fairly common vehicular crime in California. The legal definition of exhibition of speed is driving or accelerating at an unsafe speed, in order to show off for someone else.

Video surveillance cameras play an important role in criminal investigations. These cameras are in many locations, public and private, and proliferating in new places. For example,

Schwab photo

Gerald Schwab, Jr.


Schedule a Free
Case Evaluation

Law Office of Gerald Schwab, Jr.
Fresno Criminal Defense Attorney
5588 N Palm Ave,
Fresno, CA 93704
View Map
Phone: 559.441.1418