What is the Difference Between a Misdemeanor and a Felony?

The primary difference between a misdemeanor and a felony lies in the severity of the punishment associated with each offense.

Misdemeanors:

• Punishment: Typically result in a maximum of 364 days in county jail.
• Fines: Generally involve fines of $1,000 or less, though some misdemeanors can carry fines up to $10,000.
• Examples: Common misdemeanor offenses include petty theft, simple assault, DUI, and minor drug offenses.
• Additional Penalties: May include probation, community service, and mandatory rehabilitation programs.

Felonies:

• Punishment: Result in more than one year of imprisonment, typically served in state prison.
• Fines: Often exceed $10,000.
• Examples: Common felony offenses include murder, rape, burglary, grand theft, and serious drug offenses.
• Additional Penalties: Can include extended probation, parole, loss of civil rights (such as voting and firearm possession), and significant professional and personal consequences.

Do Most Cases End Up Going To Trial or Do They Settle?

In the criminal justice system, the majority of cases are resolved without going to trial. In California, approximately 80 to 90 percent of criminal cases settle through plea agreements or other forms of negotiation. The decision to settle a case or proceed to trial depends on various factors, including the strength of the evidence, the severity of the charges, the defendant’s criminal history, and the potential penalties involved.

Reasons for Case Settlements:

1. Strength of Evidence: When the prosecution has strong evidence against the defendant, both parties might find it advantageous to reach a plea agreement rather than risk a trial.
2. Lesser Penalties: Defendants may accept a plea deal to receive reduced charges or lighter sentences, avoiding the harsher penalties that could result from a trial conviction.
3. Certainty: Settling a case provides a certain outcome, whereas a trial carries the risk of an unpredictable verdict.
4. Resource Efficiency: Trials can be lengthy and costly. Both the defense and the prosecution might prefer to settle to save time and resources.

Example: Consider a case involving drug possession charges in Los Angeles. A defendant, John Doe, is found with a small amount of a controlled substance. The evidence against him includes surveillance footage, witness testimony, and the drugs found in his possession. Given the strong evidence, John’s attorney negotiates a plea deal with the prosecution. John agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge of possession for personal use rather than possession with intent to distribute. As a result, John receives a lighter sentence of probation and mandatory drug counseling instead of facing a potential multi-year prison sentence if convicted at trial.

How Much Would a Prior Play Into Resolving the Case and Sentencing?

The impact of a prior arrest or conviction on resolving a new case and determining sentencing largely depends on the nature of the previous offense, its similarity to the current charges, and the time elapsed since the prior incident. Here’s a detailed breakdown:

Arrest vs. Conviction:

• Arrest: An arrest indicates that the police or government believed the person committed a crime, but the case was either never filed or dismissed. In such instances, the individual’s criminal record remains clean, and an arrest alone is unlikely to severely impact negotiations for a new case.
• Conviction: A conviction signifies that the individual was found guilty of a crime, which creates a criminal record. This can significantly impact the ability to negotiate a favorable plea deal, especially if the conviction is recent or similar to the current charges.

Factors Influencing the Impact of a Prior Conviction:

1. Nature of the Prior Conviction:
   • Similar offenses (e.g., previous drug offenses for a current drug charge) can negatively impact plea negotiations and sentencing, as they suggest a pattern of behavior.
   • Severe crimes (e.g., violent felonies) carry more weight than minor infractions.
2. Recency of the Prior Conviction:
   • Recent convictions are more detrimental compared to those that occurred many years ago.
   • Judges and prosecutors may view recent offenses as indicative of ongoing criminal behavior.
3. California’s Three-Strikes Law:
   • Under California’s Three-Strikes Law, a prior conviction classified as a “strike” can double the prison time for a new felony charge.
   • If a person has two prior strikes, a third strike can result in a life sentence, significantly impacting the defendant’s legal strategy and the prosecution’s approach.

Example: Imagine a defendant, Jane Doe, who is currently facing felony charges for burglary. Jane has a prior conviction for burglary from five years ago. This prior conviction complicates her current case in several ways:

• Plea Negotiations: The prosecutor may be less inclined to offer a lenient plea deal due to Jane’s criminal history, particularly because her prior conviction is similar to the current charge.
• Sentencing: If Jane is convicted of the current burglary charge, the judge may impose a harsher sentence due to her previous conviction, reflecting a pattern of criminal behavior.
• Three-Strikes Law: If Jane’s prior conviction was considered a strike, and the current charge is also a strike, her sentence could be doubled. If Jane already has two strikes, she could face a life sentence if convicted.

Importance of Legal Representation

Given the complexities involved in cases with prior convictions, it is crucial to have experienced legal representation. An adept criminal defense attorney can:

• Negotiate with Prosecutors: Work to minimize the impact of prior convictions on plea deals.
• Strategize Defenses: Develop a defense strategy that addresses both the current charges and the prior convictions.
• Mitigate Sentencing: Advocate for reduced sentences by presenting mitigating factors and arguing against the relevance of past convictions.