Phoenix Criminal Defense Law Blog

Most of us have heard the phrase, "Big Brother is watching." Currently, the phrase relates to technology and the way that some in the public believe that the government uses it to track the movements of citizens. The past decade has seen advancements in technology, and more and more people are using high-tech devices in their everyday lives.

The trends put more people at risk of being monitored by the government, which is where the U.S. Supreme Court comes in. What started as a drug distribution case out of Washington, D.C., traveled its way to the court because of the constitutional issue it brings up and that is important to all of criminal law. When is using a GPS device to track a suspect a violation of their privacy?

Parenthood is difficult for anyone. Add the element of being a teen to the challenging task of parenting and the stress seems unreal. A hit MTV reality show follows teens who have become parents, and in recent years, the public has seen these teen moms face more than parenting challenges. They've been arrested for incidents of domestic violence, drug use and more.

The most recent "Teen Mom" crime drama is that one of the now 20-year-old stars is in trouble for reportedly violating a restraining order that was out against her. The reality star is not a stranger to legal trouble. In fact, she was arrested not even a week before this violation for supposed harassment and threats. Our source does not indicate who the target of that supposed behavior was.

The public can lean toward cynicism with regards to law enforcement tactics, especially when one of the law enforcement's own is the supposed perpetrator of a crime. Would an officer meet the same legal consequences as an average citizen who is arrested for suspicion of DUI?

Some are specifically questioning the extreme DUI case involving an Arizona officer who was arrested back in December. She was reportedly investigated by police after committing multiple traffic violations and ultimately became the subject of a drunk driving investigation. The incident initially resulted in charges, but they didn't last.

In our previous post, we continued a lasting discussion of now former State Senator Scott Bundgaard and his run-in with the law last February for a domestic dispute with his ex-girlfriend. His ex accused Bundgaard of domestic violence, and he ultimately pleaded no contest to misdemeanor endangerment, having consistently denied wrongdoing.

The drama that the Arizona incident sparked continues. As the last post says, Bundgaard gave up his governmental position. He didn't believe that the Senate Ethics Committee was prepared to give him a fair chance at defending his name and position. But the focus on the domestic violence matter continues, with two bills going before legislature that sources suggest were specifically inspired by the high-profile matter.

Last February, we began posting about what has remained a high-profile criminal and governmental Arizona case. State Senator Scott Bundgaard is now a former senator as a result of the incident that landed him in the limelight last year.

Bundgaard was accused of domestic violence by his former girlfriend. The couple reportedly got into an argument and pulled over on the side of the road on the night that's been in question by not only legal authorities but by the Senate Ethics Committee as well.

Last year and in years before, there have been efforts in Arizona to expand people's rights to carry a firearm onto public campuses. But 2011 came and went without such a gun rights proposal getting passed. Governor Jan Brewer and other critics of the legislative proposal saw too many gray areas in the firearm bill.

But the passion to expand gun rights in Arizona remains, and a proposal is already set to meet the Legislature as soon as Jan. 9. Supporters of the bill believe that its content this time around addresses the reasons why such bills have been rejected in the past. Of course, critics of allowing guns on campus will continue in their fight against gun rights, as well.

When you are faced with an arrest and potential criminal charge, you have the invaluable right to remain silent. That right can protect you from saying anything incriminating. Many of us never really think that we have anything to hide; therefore, why not speak up and say what we are thinking? But the law is sticky, and legal officials don't know you like you know yourself. Sometimes, they will just assume the worst.

One Arizona woman did not take advantage of her right to remain silent when she was arrested for a domestic violence incident last week. When met with law enforcement, she reportedly told them, while laughing, that she tried to teach her husband a lesson by running him over with her Jeep.

When we usher in the New Year this weekend, Arizona is ushering in more than 2012. The state is welcoming in a time when first-time DUI offenders will get a break compared to in years past. Arizona is known as a state with harsh drunk driving laws, meaning that even those arrested for a first offense will face a big life change with a DUI conviction.

Individual states are responsible to set their own drunk driving laws and sentencing, and Arizona has set laws in the past decade involving ignition interlock devices. The devices make it so that a person cannot start his car if alcohol is detected on his breath.