Front Page Articles

Regrets from an 11 Year old Deferred Adjudication case.
by Valente Gonzalez
April 10, 2004

I usually do not post people’s emails without getting permission, so after contacting the sender of this email I got permission to post it on the front page for all to read. His email is not particularly different from the others that I get but what I want is for others to read exactly what I read when an email comes through the contact us button at the top of the page.

If our readers would like to read more stories like this one please click on the Testimonials button on the left or click here.

E-Mail From: Texas Resident

I am so furious I don't even know where to start. I received DA 11 years ago. My Lawyer told me that if I kept my nose clean and completed my 3 years of DA probation I would have a clean record with no felony convictions. Well, after my probation was up I transferred with the company that I was working for to Portland, Oregon. I lived there for 6 years. I lived in 3 different apartment complexes and had 3 different jobs. I never had a problem with my record up there.Well, 9 months ago because of the economy I got layed off. My family talked me into moving back to Texas because they thought I would have a better chance of finding a job. Well, when I first got into town I was denied an apartment because I had a felony on my record. Well, going by what my lawyer told me I told them my record was clean. I went to the DPS office got finger printed and found out that my file in the database wasn't updated properly. So, then I thought the problem was fixed.

Well, I have been searching for work here in the Austin area for the last 9 months and have not had one phone call to come in and interview. I have filled out hundreds of applications and downloaded hundreds of resumes. Well, I had an interview last week for a warehouse position and went in and took several tests, filled out all the necessary paperwork and took a drug test that I found out that I had passed as soon as I took it. Well they told me that they would call me Tuesday of this week. Wednesday I hadn't heard back from them and I knew everything had been done but the background check so I gave them a call. Well, the lady told me that she was sorry but the only thing keeping me from the job was a felony conviction on my record. That is when I pulled up deferred adjudification on the Web and found this Web site.

All this time for the Last 11 years I thought my record was clean. Then I read on this website that Texas looks at DA as a felony conviction. I am so furious. My credit report is clean, my DMV is clean, I am a clean cut professional who had been out in the corporate world for 13 years as a business professional and now I won't ever be able to find a decent job to support myself. I would like to know if there is anything that can be done for my lawyer lying to me? I feel as if the court (DA's office, and my lawyer) lied to me and should be held accountable. If I would have lied about anything I would probably be sent to prison for commiting purgery. But these people can sit there and tell everyone that if they finish there probation and keep their nose clean that they will have a clean record. That is a total Lie. If I would have known that this was going to happen I would have went to court and fought my case instead of plea bargaining. I thought after my 3 years of probation I was good to go according to my lawyer. Now 11 years later I find out that my life is ruined. Can you please help me and let me know what I can do to help also.

Sincerely, Texas Resident www.deferredadjudication.org reader.racy

What about the 7 years law? What about Texas law?

by Valente G.
March 11, 2004

If asked to submit to a criminal background check ask the prospective employer’s HR representative “if the employment decision regarding the position would be based on the results of the criminal background check." Here it would be good If you have a small tape recorder to keep track of the conversation. If they say “yes” then ask them if they will follow Texas BUSINESS & COMMERCE CODE in pulling up your background. If they said “yes” and then deny you employment because of the deferred adjudication. Then request a copy of the criminal background check or the CRA and proceed to your nearest employment lawyer to see if you have a case. Every situation is different, so do not be discouraged if the first lawyer refuses to listen to your story.

BUSINESS & COMMERCE CODE
CHAPTER 20. REGULATION OF CONSUMER CREDIT REPORTING AGENCIES
§ 20.05. REPORTING OF INFORMATION

PROHIBITED. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a consumer reporting agency may not furnish a consumer report containing information related to:
(1) a case under Title 11 of the United States Code or under the federal Bankruptcy Act in which the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication predates the consumer report by more than 10 years;
(2) a suit or judgment in which the date of entry predates the consumer report by more than seven years or the governing statute of limitations, whichever is longer;
(3) a tax lien in which the date of payment predates the consumer report by more than seven years;
(4) a record of arrest, indictment, or conviction of a crime in which the date of disposition, release, or parole predates the consumer report by more than seven years; or
(5) another item or event that predates the consumer report by more than seven years.
(b) A consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report that contains information described by Subsection (a) if the information is provided in connection with:
(1) a credit transaction with a principal amount that is or may reasonably be expected to be $150,000 or more;
(2) the underwriting of life insurance for a face amount that is or may reasonably be expected to be $150,000 or more; or
(3) the employment of a consumer at an annual salary that is or may reasonably be expected to be $75,000 or more.

Texas Educators feel the Deferred Adjudication pain.

by Valente G.
March 7, 2004

Increasingly people who had their cases disposed or who had a deferred adjudication are being turned away in larger numbers. Unfair hiring practices coupled with dismissal from jobs due to unfavorable entries on a persons criminal background check have left many Texan educators with nowhere to turn. Recently on the forum X-bounty-hunter posted an article from a newsletter provided from Texas School Administrators Legal Digest. Volume 16, Number 6 June 2000. In that issue the newsletter writes that any entry should be considered for employment. Please read the newsletter to get a feel for the amount of negative responses you will get from prospective school districts.

Texas School Administrators Legal Digest. Volume 16, Number 6 June 2000.

Time to act

By Valente G.
February 29, 2004

We have to contact our state representatives. I have a new advanced letter for those of you who would like to use reason and understanding to help persuade your representative that action has to be taken to prevent the issue of deferred adjudciation from becomming more muddeled than what it is now. We need to make sure that our representatives know what it is we are seeking, and that we will stick to this cause like glue in order to make sure that our legislation is passed. Please use the following letter to help you in this cause.

Thanks,

Valente G.

Advanced letter for meeting for writing to your representative.

• Advanced Rep letter.doc
• Advance Rep letter.pdf
• Advanced Rep letter

Job Search 2004

By Valente G.
February 29, 2004

Please check the Job Search button in the future to here how deferred adjudication affects people in job interviews. It should be intresting since many people fool themselves into thinking that deferred adjudication is no big deal. Please go to the job search link in the future to read more about how deferred adjudication affects us.

Here are my attempts:

Audio from the Dallas Meeting at Richland College.

February 10, 2004

(Listen to Audio) Click here to listen to audio from the meeting.

I got a Jury Summons!

By Valente G.
February 8, 2004

Will I be able to serve on a jury? I will let you know, Feb 24 2004 I am scheduled to find out first hand if the state judicial system knows what deferred adjudication is. I am scheduled to show up for what I believe is jury selection, since I have been released from probation I should have no problems with being included in the jury selection, however because Texas seams to have a double standard on how it deals with deferred adjudication I will ask the Judge and see what he says, then I will check with a lawyer to see if I was told the truth or not. I will keep everyone postedm, please check back here for more information on this story.

Details of the case will not be shared with our readers but how they treat me will be reported. Stay tuned.

Our Dallas Meeting at Richland College.

by Valente G.
February 8, 2004

(Listen to Audio) Click here to listen to audio from the meeting.

We had an exelent meeting at Richland College, we discussed the situation that we are dealing with. We found out that even though this is by far the most important issue that our readers are dealing with many are afraid of identifying that they have a deferred adjudication or even acknowledging that they can be so severely affected by it. We found out that many of our readers are just simply unaware that this site exists and that we are doing so much good. Our attendees said that we should put more effort into advertising but were quickly amazed when they found out that we are doing so well and we have not had any funding. We urged our attendees to help get the message out about this issue, to which they acknowledged that they would give us a good effort.

The meeting/ seminar started at 12:00 and it ended at 3:00 PM

Special thanks to those in attendance,

For those who could not show up, Here is a summary of what occurred.

Dave Lindel Explained how Texas is only 1 out of 7 other states that does not have exungment relief available.

Christian Sosa Lawyer from Dallas took questions about the subject of Non Disclosure.

Mr. Dewit Explained that he has knowledge of how to put together an NPO for us.

Mr. Entenza from Houston said that he would be willing to help me put together a few meetings in Houston.

We outlined what we needto do for the next legislative session. We agreed to inform the public how important it is to work with representatives on this issue of deferred adjudication. We will continue to drive home this subject until our readers fully understand how to approached their legislators, and how to talk to them to have them gain a better understanding of how deferred adjudication affects us.

How to get your records sealed.

by Valente G.
January 31, 2004

I am not a lawyer, but Non Disclosure is not good enough, if the ever law changes (and it will) and mandates that our record be made public again then those of you who are succesful in getting ND will have wasted your time and money sealing your records.

Warning: Non Disclosure is (not!) a solution to this problem. What we need is a full expungment of these records, not a (band-aid) solution like non-disclosure. Your record will still be there, available to Police, Schools, Banks, Insurance Agencies, Licensing boards, Certain Apartments, to the Heath Care industry, and other public and private entities. Even with a granting of Non Disclosure, do you really trust Texas to seal your record? Remember this wonderful law of ND is from the same people who told you that Deferred adjudication was not a conviction, so why do we even need the order of ND?

If you think there is still more to do then click here.

Because many of you are not familiar with the courts I urge that none of our readers try to file this petition without proper legal representation. It is strongly recommended.

Here are the links so that you can file your useless order of ND.

"U.S. to Start Airline Background Checks"(AP) for passengers!

By LESLIE MILLER Associated Press Writer
Editorial by Valente G.
January 27, 2004

They are going to prevent people convicted of violent offences from boarding. By the way, a DA for federal purposes is considered a conviction so some of you will be prevented from flying. For those of you who have kidnapping on your record as a result of an unfortunate family situation such as a divorce, you may not even be allowed near the airport. Kidnapping is just too close to hostage taking when it comes to flying. Now that you know the possibilities please help us change Texas state law click here.

This is outrageous, why is the government giving the green light to illegal immigrants through the use of an amnesty program, and yet is persecuting and trampling on the rights of its own citizens? The government has ignored the border crisis, and instead decided to focus in on citizens with backgrounds, why are we trying so hard to fix a simple problem of terrorism. If the government is afraid of terrorist just stop them from getting into the country. Why are they punishing us twice, why can’t they just do their jobs right the first time and leave us alone? Here are some quotes from the story.

"The Computer-Assisted Passenger Prescreening System, or CAPPS II, would screen all passengers by checking that information against commercial and government databases. Each passenger would be given one of three color-coded ratings.

Suspected terrorists or violent criminals would be designated "red" and forbidden to fly. Passengers who raised questions would be classified "yellow" and would receive extra security screening. Most would be "green" and simply go through routine screening."

Click here to read the full article.
http://news.findlaw.com/ap/a/w/1152/1-27-2004/20040127104503_12.html

If they take the link off click here

Just another guy looking for a Job.

January 30, 2004
by Valente G.

Soon I will be looking for a job, since I have deferred adjudication I will be talking to HR representatives to try to get my self gainful employment. I will keep a Journal of all of my attempts to find Gainful employment. Please check back I will put a link up a special link for our readers to hear and read about my attempts to find a job. If anyone knows of any good job leads in the Houston area for someone good in Desktop support or Helpdesk then please let me know. Please contact me at valente@deferredadjudication.org.

Thanks,
Valente Gonzalez
Web Master www.deferredadjudication.org

Check out this power point presentation.

January 6, 2004
By Amber F.

Amber has reached out to as many people as she can. We are proud of what she has done to try to bring about change to the issue of deferred adjudication. As part tools that she is using to try to bring about change she has put together a nice Power Point presentation on the subject. The presentation is now on our web page, and we encourage others to see it. And to perhaps follow her lead in making quality work like this.

Please click here to see the presentation Power Point.

Click here to discuss Ambers Power Point.

Time to write the governor.

by Valente G.
December 30, 2003

To Everyone,
I want you to print out and send in the support letter I am providing. It is urgent that we get as much support for our cause before the start of the next session. We must urge our families and our friends to stand behind us on this issue by sending in these letters. The more are delivered, the more importance they will be given in the next session.

Too many times I have been asked,” What can I do to help?”

I am calling on all of you to fight for what will benefit you, what will indirectly benefit all of Texas. Do your part and work hard at it, send in as many letters from different people this time! We need to flood the governor with these letters, we need to make sure that his office answers our plea for help. In return just understand that any efforts made to pass bills in our favor will be to all of our benefit.

Thanks,
Valente G.
www.deferredadjudication.org Web Master
Harris County, TX
valente@deferredadjudication.org

Click here to discuss Time to write the governor.

Things you need to know about the Texas legislature

by Valente G.
December 27, 2003

Ok readers, welcome back to the year before the next session. For many readers this is the first time you have been aware that Texas legislature only meets once every two years on odd numbered years. The information below will help you understand more about your government.

The Texas Legislature:
In Texas, all legislative power is vested by the state's Constitution in a bicameral (Senate and House of Representatives) body called “The Legislature of the State of Texas. It meets for 140 days max. The Legislature is required by the Constitution to meet every two years (odd-numbered years) in Austin at noon on the second Tuesday in January” (http://www.national.com/govnews/texas2.html).

Senate:
The Senate is currently composed of 31 members, each elected for a four-year term.

House of Representatives:
The House of Representatives is currently comprised of 150 members, each elected for a two-year term running for re-election in even-numbered years.

The Governor:
“ The Governor of Texas is the chief executive of the state and is elected by the citizens every four years. The Governor makes policy recommendations that lawmakers in both the House and Senate chambers may sponsor and introduce as bills” (http://www.governor.state.tx.us/about/duties). The governor does not make law, but he can put a lot of pressure on people to make the law if he wants it passed. Unlike the Legislature, he is always in charge, he works every year, not every other year like the legislature.

The governor is our best hope for getting help for our issue, we urge everyone to write your stories to him.

Click here to discus Things you need to know about the Texas legislature

Law not all that it seems

When Nick Rabe returned from celebrating his grandfather's 80th birthday in South Africa, he waited in line to pass customs at the Atlanta Hartsfield International Airport. He had a connecting flight to catch to Houston in two hours.

So when officials checked him in and said "something's come up on the computer," he wasn't quite sure what was going on. He was impatient and tired after a long, international flight. He certainly didn't think he was facing deportation.

Officials took him to a locked, windowless room with about four other people.

"I thought, 'What the hell is going on here?'" he said.

Originally from South Africa, Rabe, 22, has been in the United States since 1994, and a legal resident since 1996. He went to high school in Houston. He's studying to be an airport technician. He's also been arrested twice for possession of marijuana - for both he received deferred adjudication.

And that's where the problem comes in. According to Texas criminal law, deferred adjudication is not a conviction of guilt unless the defendant violates probation. It is a plea-bargain in which the defendant does not plead guilty to the charge and completes a probationary period rather than serving time in jail.

On the face of it, deferred adjudication seems like a good deal. But the detail that continues to escape many Texans and their lawyers is that deferred adjudication remains on a person's record. And for purposes of federal law, it is a conviction and can result in deportation of a non-citizen.

Betty Blackwell, an Austin-based criminal attorney, has traveled around the state in an effort to clear up misconceptions about deferred adjudication.

"Lawyers are very confused about it," Blackwell said, adding that "lawyer after lawyer" has confessed to her they thought they could get their clients' deferred adjudication expunged.

But, Blackwell said, the expunction statute clearly states only cases that have been dismissed or in which clients plead not guilty can be expunged.

"A lot of innocent people plead guilty to deferred, thinking it won't show up [on their records] and think it will be cheaper than getting a lawyer," Blackwell said. "But it does show up on your record, and you can never get it off," she said, adding that "a huge number of people took very bad advice."

Immigrants face harsher consequences

For non-citizens, deferred adjudication looks even more grim.

Before 1997, deferred adjudication was not considered a conviction for immigration purposes, said Barbara Hines, an award-winning immigration law expert and professor at the University's law school.

A 1997 law, authored by U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, changed the law, making it a deportable conviction that applies retroactively.

"So persons that pleaded guilty [to deferred adjudication] on reliance on the old law, now face deportation," Hines said.

Before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, immigration officials would typically comb jails for persons eligible for deportation under the new law, Hines said.

"Since then, there has been a more sophisticated database between all law enforcement agencies," Hines said.

People who have been going back and forth over the border for years now face deportation proceedings for previous convictions that never showed up before, she said.

Hines said many immigrants don't understand how vulnerable they are as non-citizens.

"Especially people who come here as immigrants and live here all their lives don't understand that they can be deported," Hines said.

Between 1996 and 2001, Hines said the press picked up on what was happening with immigrants and exerted a lot of pressure on lawmakers to restore waivers - allowing people to apply for exceptions to deportation rules based on the seriousness of the crime, when it occurred, the person's participation in the community and the type of situation the person would return to.

"But after 9/11, things got a lot worse," Hines said. "[Immigra-tion lawyers] are very pessimistic. Each rendition got so much worse. You just never know how much worse it could get."

Hines advised immigrants to naturalize as soon as possible so "they can have the same rights as the rest of us. They are held to a much higher standard."

And most importantly, she said, criminal lawyers should coordinate with immigration lawyers before accepting pleas for their clients.

Most immigration cases get to immigration lawyers when it's too late, she said.

Officials eventually issued Rabe a temporary travel permit, and he was allowed to return to Houston.

Now Rabe is appealing the deportation, but it will be a long 18 months before his fate is determined. If his appeal is refused, he said he will probably go to the Netherlands, where he has some family friends.

"There's absolutely nothing I can do," he said. "It's not in my hands."

Rabe's future depends on the Board of Immigration Appeals and his attorney, Terry Weir.

"Nick's case is a prime example of how deferred adjudication, as defined by immigration, is different than in the criminal system," Weir said. "The result is really detrimental to folks who have invested their entire lives here. What he ends up suffering is so much greater than someone who is a citizen."

Weir said it can happen to anyone who is "simply at the wrong place at the wrong time."

For U.S. citizens, the

problem doesn't go away

Austin resident Amber Fazzino, 19, was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Unlike Rabe, she is a U.S. citizen. But like Rabe, taking deferred adjudication on advice of her lawyer has made life more difficult than she could have imagined.

Fazzino was 17 when she was arrested at a rave for passing out fake Ecstasy tablets, filled with Robitussin. Fazzino said she had no idea the tablets were fake. Her friend told her to hand the tablet to the person sitting next to her.

That person turned out to be an undercover police officer, and both Fazzino and her friend were arrested.

Fazzino said she "picked a lawyer out the hat," after being inundated by fliers from defense lawyers.

Fazzinobelieves she was mistreated by her attorney. She said he told her it would "wipe it off your record" if she completed her probation term.

Almost two years later, Fazzino applied for a job at Target and "was pretty much hired" until the store did a criminal background check and sent her a letter citing her drug conviction. Her application for an apartment in Austin was also rejected.

Fazzino believes she could have received the same sentence without an attorney. She also believes she should have been given more options since she was only 17, and it was her first conviction.

"I feel like I was being manipulated, like I was betrayed by the whole process," she said.

Fazzino contacted Texans for Reform of Deferred Adjudication, a group of citizens who feel they were misled about their sentence and are now suffering the consequences. She now heads the organization's Austin chapter.

Their efforts led to state legislation enabling citizens who have completed their probation period under deferred adjudication to apply to have their records sealed from the public.

The legislation makes the information available to police officers and federal officials, including immigration services.

This law was heavily protested by media groups, like the Texas Association of Broadcasters.

"Someone might run for office in 20 years time. They might have done something, and we'll never find out about it," said Michael Schneider, who led the association's open government task force during the legislative session.

While she could not comment on either Rabe or Fazzino's specific cases, Blackwell said there are very few cases in which she would recommend deferred adjudication.

"Not unless your only other option is going to jail," she said.

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

AP Reporter needs our help to write our Deferred Adjudication story.

By Brian Bergstein of Associated Press posted on the forum
December 3, 2003

My name is Brian Bergstein, and I am a technology reporter with Associated Press in New York. I've been talking with some members of your group about deferred adjudication and how it can affect people who apply for jobs. I understand this is a very sensitive issue. However, if you would be willing to share your experience, on the record, with your real name, of being rejected for a job after a background check turned up a DA, please write me at bbergstein@ap.org. Any such real-life experiences would be very insightful for a story I'm working on about the role that Internet databases have on privacy in America. Thanks very much for your time.

So who is the AP?

Read their mission statement.

"The AP's Mission
The Associated Press is in the information business. Its fundamental mission is to provide state, national and international news, photos, graphics, broadcast and online services of the highest quality, reliability and objectivity to its domestic owners as economically as it can. The AP is a member-driven company." Click here to read the rest.

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

China slave labor is one reason that we do not have good jobs.

By Valente G.
December 1, 2003

Next time you go to the Wal-Mart check out where the product is made that you are purchasing. Isn't it surprising that some political prisoner in China makes the products that you buy at Wal-Mart. That was a job that was sent to China, and now the president has backtracked on his efforts to wage a trade war with the Chinese. People on DA stand to gain by brining back those jobs; this is going to be a goal of ours in the future. I want everyone to know that people on deferred adjudication have lost jobs to the Chinese, to Mexico, to Canada, and to other countries where labor is cheaper, and where employers do not face liability suits for hiring people who have had Deferred Adjudication.

[Wu witnessed two Public Security officers beating a prisoner with a construction beam. The rumble of mine cars drowned his screams of pain. “In the dark pits,” he writes, “the dust billowed from the face of the mine, where men cut the coal. The floor of the mine was wet, with an evil odor. The prisoners bent forward, knowing they would have to work for twelve hours, until they had achieved their daily quota.”] http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/1/8/191237.shtml

Also check out what some political watchdog group says about Wal-Mart

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3046wal-mart_pricing.html

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

Background checks do not work for people who come from countries that do not keep background information.

By Valente G.
November 30, 2003

How naive can businesses in the United States be? It is surprising that a person like Gao Zhan can pass a background check and then be allowed to work. The injustice of deferred adjudication has caused many qualified American workers with minor infractions to be denied employment. Instead companies look to get qualified applicants from other countries, who have no adverse background histories. In spite of all of the background information available on American candidates, employers are not able to get background information on applicants who arrive from other countries.

Even though China is trying to develop weapons to kill us, employers did not raise any concern or worry about employing Gao Zhan, instead they gave her access to high-tech processors that she shipped back to China. This was a clear form of industrial espionage. That means that soon those jobs that we had in producing the special high tech chips will now be exported to China. “The numerous Chinese diaspora in America, a large number of students, scientists and businessmen from China residing in the US make the task of the Chinese intelligence easier” (Bubnov).

http://english.pravda.ru/world/20/91/366/11395_China.html

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

Thanks to the Austin Leaders for their efforts recently.

By Valente G.
November 24, 2003

This Thanksgiving there is news out of Austin, a few weeks ago we recruited a new member to our efforts with respect to Deferred Adjudication. Our Austin leader has a most important place for making significant progress toward a free tomorrow. We hope to make it possible to have someone available to contact legislators in the next legislative session, and that is why Austin will be so important. Efforts of the Austin leaders currently include:

1. Trying to recruit the daughter of a very influential politician.
2. Writing petition letters to our governor .
3. To try to raise awareness for our cause.

We hope that she is successful in her efforts to garner support for relieving the burden of deferred adjudication on all those who are affected in the State of Texas. She has found that by making a difference her feelings of helplessness has dissipated, and her life has become upbeat because of her new goals and her new successes. We urge all of our readers to follow in her example; she has found what we have been preaching. Do something, do anything, be creative and exercise your freedom of speech, only then will our readers feel the reward that comes with helping bring about change in Texas.

Special thanks to Amber Fazzino, and Leon from Austin, we salute you for your efforts.
Happy Thanksgiving,
www.deferredadjudication.org

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

TIME LIMITS FOR REPORTING CRIMINAL RECORDS ON A BACKGROUND CHECK IN THE STATE OF TEXAS

Time Limites for reporting criminal records on a background check in the State of Texas (Listen to Audio)

By D Lindel
November 18, 2003

One of the biggest problems that people have with a deferred adjudication (DA) on their record is the problems that it causes in finding a job, renting a place to live, getting some types of insurance, and obtaining some state issued professional licenses. There are other issues created by a DA, but the main ones outlined above seem to affect nearly everyone.

A background check, as it has become known as, is in reality part of a greater more in depth report that can delve into other areas such as your credit standing, character, general reputation, mode of living, driving records, property ownership, civil court records, education, sex offender, and last but not least, criminal records. These types of reports are more accurately known as a “consumer report” as identified by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)and the Texas Business & Commerce Code. Businesses that regularly engage wholly or partly in assembling this type of information, and sell it to a third party for a monetary fee are identified as a “consumer reporting agency” (CRA) and are subject to regulation under both the federal and state statutes, FCRA and Business & Commerce Code.

Prior to 1999 there was a time limit of 7 years under both statutes that said any negative information pertaining to credit history, bankruptcies, civil suits, paid tax liens, accounts place for collection, and criminal records was not reportable after 7 years from the date that the court release.. In 1999 The FCRA was amended as far as the reporting of criminal records as that time limit was changed to an open ended period with no time limits. However, at this time Texas and 11 other states elected to stick with the old seven year rule as covered under the Business & Commerce Code. (Business and Commerce Code Chapter 20 Subsection 20.05 "Reporting of Information Prohibited). This is very important: This 7 year limitation is only applicable if there is a CRA involved in developing the consumer report for sale to a third party. If a prospective employer does the investigation themselves, there are no time limits as to what can be reported to the prospective employer.

Now you’re most likely asking “What good does this do me?” The answer is that more and more employers are hiring a CRA to do the consumer report on prospective employees as most don’t understand the law and don’t want to face any liability if they make a mistake. Generally the tip off to the prospective employee as to whither a CRA is involved is that the authorization form for the report to be run will ask for information only for the past 7 years. Also this form will be separate from the application itself. If the report comes back with incorrect information, there is a process allowed by both the FCRA and the Business & Commerce Code that allows the “consumer” (job applicant) to dispute the incorrect information and the CRA must reinvestigate and correct the report or the CRA is subject to monetary penalties.

The bottom line is that if you apply for a job, housing, insurance, etc., and the consumer report is being developed by a CRA, and your offense is over 7 years old, there should, by law, be no problem for the applicant.

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

This Is Your Life I Am Talking About Here!

This is your life I am talking about here! (Listen to Audio)

by Rob Sandifer
November 8, 2003

This is the most important article that has ever been posted on www.deferredadjudication.org I do not say this lightly. I say that it is the most important article ever posted because this article is about you. That's right. I am speaking to each and everyone of you whose lives have been impacted by the negative implications of deferred adjudication, hereafter referred to simply as "DA".

If you have ever been denied employment or lost a job because of DA, then this article is about you. If you have been one of the lucky ones who actually had a job, and then your employer fired you after finding about your DA, then this article is about you.
If you have ever been denied apartment housing because of DA, then this article is about you. If you have ever been denied the opportunity to do volunteer work for a volunteer agency because of DA, then this article is about you. If you have ever been denied the opportunity to participate in any of your child's school district sponsored, after hours extracurricular activities because of DA, then this article is about you. If you have ever been denied a state or federal job/occupational license because of DA, then this article is about you. If you have ever been denied membership to any of the well known
civic or private clubs because of DA, then this article is about you. If you have ever been denied the opportunity to enroll in a job training program or college degree program because of DA, then this article is about you. Literally hundreds of thousands of people all across our state (we have estimated 1.4 million people total) fall into these categories I mentioned above. Scary isn't it? It should be...... Every single day, more people are joining the above listed categories. Everyday some poor, unfortunate mother or father,
husband or wife, son or daughter, sister or brother has to go home and explain to their family members and loved ones that they lost their job and can no longer support their
family because of DA. And when they lose their job, they are not just losing their paychecks; they lose the ability to provide medical insurance coverage for their family. They also lose any and all sense of dignity of who and what they are as a human being. Yes folks, we as private citizens of the state of Texas are slowly and incrementally losing our very right to make a living and live as honest, productive members of society right here in our great state! The really sad part about all of this is that WE have allowed it to happen to ourselves due to complacency, apathy, and outright neglect of our civil duties and responsibilities to ourselves and to our loved ones. If this apathy and complacency on our part does not change, and change very quickly, then we might as well all resign ourselves to the fact that since we are deciding not be be "good citizens" by refusing to get involved and working hard to change the laws in our state, then we better learn how to become "good criminals" and learn how to make an "illegal living" as opposed to making an honest, dignified "legal living". At the present rate with which employers, apartment leasing managers, volunteer agencies, state licensing agencies, federal agencies, public/private colleges, credit reporting agencies, school districts, etc are conducting background checks and denying people jobs who have DA on their records, we will soon not have ANY opportunities left to obtain gainful employment which pay decent enough wages to make a living for ourselves and our families. Everyone reading this article needs to wake up and finally realize that we are in a crisis situation here. The problems caused by DA are not going to go away on their own. They will continue to stay with us and ruin our lives and the lives of our families until we all, individually and collectively, make up our minds and decide that we are going to take personal responsibility and do our part to change the current criminal record expunction laws in this state so that all of us can have our lost civil rights returned to us. Then, and only then will we ever be able breathe easily again whenever we fill out a job application or apply for an apartment lease or apply to be a volunteer at any volunteer agency wanting only to help someone in need....

Understandably, many of you are hesitant to become involved in our efforts to change the law because you worry that somehow someone might find out that you had once been arrested and took deferred adjudication. I would like to take this opportunity to clear something up about this once and for all. First, and most important: Due to the fact that you were previously arrested and took deferred adjudication, the whole entire world is now able to find out all of this information about you - and it only costs them $3.15 to do so. Anyone can now log onto the Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Records Database, pay $3.15, and find out about your entire criminal history !!!! That's right!
You have already been exposed! Therefore, refusing to join in the effort to change the current laws because you are afraid of "being found out" is absolutely the most counterproductive, most foolish thing you can do with regard to your future. What you must now realize, once and for all, is that if you are EVER going to get your life back to normal as you once knew it, then you must make up your mind, once and for all, that you are going to put forth the determination and effort that will make it possible to get your life back. Trying to run and hide from this problem is the absolute worse thing you can do!

During the previous (78th) legislative session in June/2003, a relatively small number of people succeeded in getting Senate Bill 1477 drafted and passed into law. SB 1477 was actually a compromise bill which was passed into law instead of House Bill 181, which was a much broader, and better bill from our standpoint. In our opinion, it (SB 1477) is not a very good bill because it is too restrictive in who it helps and how it helps them. In addition, we do not think SB 1477 is a good law for the following reasons:

(1) SB 1477 does not allow for automatic sealing of records, even AFTER the
time requirements have been met (10 years for felonies; 5 years for
misdemeanors) In order to get an order of "non-disclosure" of public
records, you must go in front of a judge, after you have waited the required
5 or 10 years. And even then, the judge can still rule against you and
disallow your request for "non-disclosure"! Plus, going in front of a judge
usually means that, in order to stand any reasonable chance of getting the
judge to rule in your favor means that you almost have to hire an attorney!
And even then the judge can still deny your request!!!!
(2) Even if you are one of the "lucky ones" whom the judge rules in your favor,
being given a "non-disclosure" by the judge does not really hide your record
from everyone! Law enforcement agencies are still allowed to see your
record. School districts are still allowed to see your record. And government
agencies are still allowed to see your record! This by itself pretty much
makes a joke out of the new law. Sad but true!
(3) In the state of Texas, whatever new laws are created by the state legislature
can also be "uncreated" by any future legislative session that comes after!
In other words, even after paying hundreds of dollars for an attorney to try
to win you an order of "non-disclosure" by a district judge, all of your
efforts can be "un-done" IF the state legislature decides to nullify SB 1477
during a future legislative session!!! Sad....but very true! What we need to
do is work on getting legislation drafted which will actually expunge
(destroy) these records once and for all so that future legislative sessions
cannot come along and take away our legislative victory!

For the many of you reading this article thinking that the new "non-disclosure" bill (SB 1477) is going to solve your problems, you better think again. While it might temporarily "hide" your arrest record/record of the court action from the general public, there are very real, potential problems for abuse. For discussion sake, let's just say that you go to apply for an apartment lease. Then, the apartment leasing office knows that they are going to run a background check on you. Theoretically, they do no have access to your record under the new law. But there is a very, very easy way around that for them. The apartment leasing manager, in all probability, knows someone personally who works on the school board, a hospital, a law enforcement agency, or any of the other entities who are still allowed by law to view your supposedly "non-disclosureable" police record. See the point I am driving at there? All it takes for someone to see your record is for them to use the "buddy system" and pretty soon, the whole non-disclosure law just falls apart and is not worth the paper it is printed. Please do not misunderstand me. I think that Senator Royce West (the Texas state Senator who authored SB 1477) worked really hard on this bill and had very noble intentions. His efforts and those of his staff are to be commended. But the fact remains that this bill falls way, way short on what it should be delivering to the people of Texas who are affected by DA - it should be delivering back to them all of their civil rights and freedoms that were taken away the moment they signed up for DA. What we need is a bill passed into law which will permanently destroy those records so that *** NO ONE *** has access to them, every again. The state of Texas made an agreement with us, when we signed up for DA, that we would not suffer the penalties, disqualifications, etc imposed by law upon those who
have actually convicted. The state of Texas even goes so far to say that DA is NOT to be treated as a conviction. That's right ! You heard me right...its right there in "black and
white ! Please reference: Article 42.12 Sec. 5(c) Texas Code of Criminal Procedure

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/cp/cp0004200.html#cp030.42.12.

Also, reference: Art 42.12 Sec 20 (a) Texas Code of Criminal Procedure

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/cp/cp0004200.html#cp030.42.12.

We believe that the state of Texas is in violation of its contract with us; which is the contract you signed with the state when you signed up for DA. We believe that it is time for the state to fix this problem so that we can get our lives back. By passing SB 1477 into law, the state of Texas admitted that DA is a problem that needs to be fixed. But SB 1477 was the only thing that the state was willing to do to address the problem. That being said, let it be known that the state is NOT going to TRULY fix this problem unless WE force them too. The happy part about this is that it CAN be done. The truly sad part is that not nearly enough people are getting involved and doing their part to help fix this issue. If you are one of the many hundreds of thousands of people in Texas who are afflicted by this issue, then why not get involved and help become part of the solution? You have nothing to lose - and everything to gain. To those of you who decide to join the fight and work with us to restore our lost civil rights and freedoms, I commend you for your decision to become an active, participatory citizen in the democratic process. Remember, down through the decades and centuries, members of our armed forces fought and died so that you would have the opportunity to be part of the democratic process and live in a free society. Live up to your duties! Do NOT let their sacrifices be in vain. Make a commitment today, to your family, friends, and to yourself on becoming a fully informed, participating Texas state citizen. And remember - this article is about YOU !

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

Computer Glitch Gives Deferred Adjudication Rap Sheets.

This story was written by James Clark of Channel 13 Lubbock, TX. October 17.
Click here to see the Video from Lubbock

A computer glitch means people who should have a clean record instead have a felony rap sheet and nobody knows how many people were wrongfully convicted by this computer glitch.

It can be devastating for someone trying to get a job, borrow money, or rent a house. Could it be you? If you're on deferred adjudication it can. District Clerk Barbara Sucsy says her office had nothing to do with making the problem. But she will have everything to do with fixing it. "We have information here and we can fix it," she says. "As far as the large scope of how many people this has affected, we don't know the answer to that."

But here's what she does know. The glitch affects people on deferred adjudication. Perhaps someone you know or love made a mistake, got arrested, and wants a second chance. That's what deferred adjudication is for. Someone can serve probation and if he or she stays out of trouble the judge wipes their little mistake off their record. But it's not off their record, and that's the problem.

When the Lubbock county computers transmitted records to the Department of Public Safety, something went wrong. "Our priority when this came to a head and became aware of the problem, it was our priority to fix it. And we're much more concerned about getting it fixed because there are human beings involved and they're having personal problems because of this. And we want to fix it. And then go back and see what the problem was," says Sucsy.

We don't know if it's every single deferred adjudication case, or only a few. Nobody knows. The investigation continues.

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

New Texas law relieves minor offenses from record

By Bart Shirley of the Battalion Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

Do your part and help fix this issue.

By Valente G.
September 29, 2003

I am going to be taking some classes until the end of the year, I suggest that everyone use the forum board to post and ask questions. I urge that everyone listen to my final audio message.

IF YOU REGISTER TO USE THE FORUM, YOU NEED TO CHECK YOUR EMAIL SO THAT YOU CAN COMPLETE YOUR REGISTRATION PROCESS!!

(Listen to Audio) Voting is not a lost cause by Valente G. (Listen to Audio)

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

This is another reason why we have trouble finding jobs.

by Robert E. Scott of http://epinet.org

Click here to read more.
If they take the link off click here.

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

We have a new forum board.

By Valente G.
September 21, 2003

If you are visiting our forum, you will notice that our forum board has changed. The old forum will be removed shortly and will only be accessible by clicking on a separate ICON. Our readers will notice that the new board will be slick and new with better features than the old one. The ability to search will be a great new advantage for readers wishing to read our posts on the new message board. Also by subscribing to the message board our readers will be able to take advantage of our mass mail features. So everyone enjoy our new board it is meant to be used.

During the testing of the forum board several users tried to register, we apologize to those users because they were unsuccessful due to our SMTP settings. However; one of those users named Lee notified me in time and I was able to correct the problem so that our users could begin using the forum on Monday. Thanks Lee for notifying me of the issue.

Thanks,
Valente G.
Web Master

Click here to post your comments to this story on our discussion board.

To Honorable Royce West:

by Lyngso
September 17, 2003

I wish to thank you for having introduced SB 1477 creating the new
possibility to obtain an order of Non-Disclosure for Deferred Adjudications.

I received Deferred Adjudication in Harris County in 1996 which was
successfully completed and I qualified in every way to file a petition for
Non-Disclosure. I did so on September 2, 2003 and as such I was definitely
among the first customers in the shop.

A hearing was set for yesterday September 16, but it was discontinued
because the judge, Rowena Young sitting for Mark Atkinson in Criminal Court
No. 13, Harris County, Texas, did not know if procedures had been
established and because the District Attorney claimed not to have received
proper notice.

It did not come as a surprise that officials in Harris County did not have
all their ducks in a row which became painfully clear when I on August 28th
attempted to ascertain if procedures had been put in place.

A major question at the time was who had to give the required notice to the
State and a confirmation that the State would be the District Attorney. - In
order to safeguard the issue I put the District Attorney on notice myself
and upon inquiry was told by the Court Clerk that she personally handed it
to the individual handling the matter in the DA's office (Mr.. Scott Durfee)
on the day of the filing.

The matter was heard today and my petition was denied because granting the
petition was not in the best interest of justice.

In arriving at that point, the Assistant District Attorney objected by
citing allegations made in police reports at the time by the complainant for
which charges were not filed and therefore never tried and proven. The
hearing then suddenly turned into a defense of allegations that had never
before been introduced into court. Judge Rowena overruled my objections and
allowed the District Attorney to cite the police reports without actually
providing a copy as evidence. - It should further be noted that the police
report related to this arrest carries no reference to the matters cited by
the DA. - I happen to have a complete copy rather than the public
information report.

There were no objection to the format and I am attaching a copy for your
ready reference.

Having test driven your product, it appears that perhaps it needs to be
clarified who is to give notice to the State and how. It also seems to me
that the courts have been given a wide berth when it has to determine what
is in the best interest of justice and I believe that this issue needs to be
narrowed and defined much more clearly.

Although it was not said, I walked away with the distinct impression that
both the judge and the DA look unfavorable upon this law. (This is of course
Harris County). Yesterday Judge Young took a long hard look at my petition
reading it side by side with the law and determined that she could not act
on it because it did not show the case number. She relented on that when she
realized this was stated on top of the petition.

Whenever a case is being filed there will be circumstances and police
reports that are unfavorable to the Defendant. After all, that is the reason
the Defendant was charged and witnesses will almost certainly make statement
not in favor of the accused.

Based on the precedent set today, it will therefore seem that there is a
very low threshold of acceptance of objections by the State and that this
legislation may not fulfill its legislative intent.

It is my understanding that most other states have laws that allow
expunction of records with much less stringent requirements. While I am not
certain of the details, I am certain you are. - Also in many states Deferred
Adjudication is referred to as Supervision or Court Supervision. - Many
people outside the legal system and outside Texas do not understand what
Deferred Adjudication means. But it does sound very serious.

The serious ring to the name, the lack of understanding of the terms and the
fact that other states have laws allowing expunctions of records for
misdemeanors on less stringent terms, would cause a person with a Texas
record, presumably a person from Texas, to appear less favorably than a
person from another state who may have had a similar record thereby putting
such person at a disadvantage in various screening situations.

In closing, I would be more than happy to provide any other detail you may
require.

Very truly yours
Lyngso

To www.deferredadjudication.org:

by Lyngso
September 17, 2003

I only this morning became aware of your web site and can promise you that I
would have been involved had I known about it previously.

I am proud to say that I was one of the first customers in the shop and
filed my petition On September 2nd at 11:47, which was about 3:30 hrs later
than I had hoped. The hearing was yesterday September 16th.

On August 28th, I called the various institutions to see if a procedure had
been established. After the fog lifted I would have to say the answer was
NO. I spoke to Charles Bacarisse's office (Clyde Lemon) the staff attorney
and he barely knew the law existed. The Judge's staff, County Criminal
Court, knew about the law, but had n procedure. I spoke to Mr. Rosenthal
himself and he was very abrupt and told me to let the clerk handle it.

One major concern of mine was who is supposed to give Notice to The State
and for that matter which State entity. This issue is still somewhat unclear
to me.

Yesterday morning Sept. 16th, was the time for the big test and surely
Harris County officials came through again with the usual low flying colors.

The judge was totally unprepared and did not know how to handle my petition
She went over it with a fine comb and after a question or two could not find
any problem with it.

The DA's problem was that they had not been given the required notice.
However, and so sad for them, since I could not get any good clarification
who was supposed to give them this notice, I gave notice myself, just to
cover this and the Judge hadno choice but to accept that.

The Judge needed to think about it and we are going back this morning Sept
17th because he Judge wanted check for correct procedures and make sure
things are right and allow the DA to check my criminal record.

I have been all over this case, because I just recently discovered that the
record read that I pleaded guilty. I was very noisy about this and in the
process have come to disagreements with the Clerk's Office and DPS because they
absolutely refuse to let the record reflect that "The Court did not enter an
adjudication of guilt" but only say the "Deferred Adjudication Discharged".

Reading the "Background and Purpose" for SB 1477 I wholeheartedly agree. At
the time I was told, that the record would read that I had been found NOT
GUILTY which is not correct as a matter of procedure and in my cae turned
out differently.

What I am missing from the "Background and Purpose" of SB 1477 is the fact
that most states allow misdemeanor to be expunged under various conditions,
such as after a period of time, depending on the offense and so on. Texas is
apparently one of the last states to get onboard on this issue.

This means that a person with a Deferred Adjudication in Texas, is at a
disadvantage with persons from other states with a similar offense in that
such person has a record and the other does not.

I believe that this is a point that shoud be brought home to our
legislators.

Best regards
Lyngso

Join the ARMY if you can.

by Valente G.
September 17, 2003

Nobody has a right to serve in the United States Army. Federal law and Department of Defense directives give the military services significant leeway in determining who they want to accept for enlistment or commission.

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/blarcriminal.htm

Look at how other States handel criminal records.

by Valente G.
September 17, 2003

Our state is making it impossible for us to leave the state. The state laws in place are counter productive and need to be changed, we need to do our part to change them. Look at this information on how other states treat crime.

Check out Marty's Opinion one more time.

by Valente G.
September 17, 2003

The Letter by Marty of www.wipetheslateclean.com offers a very detailed reason why the issue of deferred adjudication should be visited by legislators.
Click here to read

Get ready to fill out petition letters for 2005, 79th session.

by Valente G.
September 14, 2003

Attention readers, since the 78th session is now a distant memory, I am urging all of my readers to prepare the groundwork for the next session. The 79th session promises to be one of the most important sessions for our readers. Since we had a warm reception with several representatives, and senators last session, we hope that we will again see good cooperation with representatives during the next session. As such, we need to prepare the groundwork for our important message. We need to get letters signed and sent in by the truckload. We need to be persistent and fix the issue that has impacted our lives so badly.

Since many have asked what they can do to help, I am offering the task of doing the only thing that worked for us last time. As Rob Sandifer and Marty have stated, we need to get our elected officials on our side. Our representatives will only work for us if they believe that our numbers are substantial enough to merit action on their part. For that reason I have devised a plan of action that will begin with a letter drive. Since there is a lot of time between now and the 2005, 79th session, I will prepare several informative how to information sessions and PowerPoint presentations between now and the 2005 session.

Also since the needs for funding are becoming evident to me, I will begin to ask for donations to keep my site going. I need to find out how I can best fund my actives, but since there are many people who are willing to help but are unable to lend time to this effort, I think they may be willing to support my website and my activities as I attempt to fend off the onslaught of issues that affect people with deferred adjudication. Until I figure all of this out, I want the readers who can to send mail to their elected representatives. Lets get ready for the 79th session.

Click here to go to the petition page for the 2005, 79th legislative session.

Also look at the navigation bar, for the Letter Drive button.

What has changed since September 11, 2001?

by Valente G.
September 10, 2003

The fear that Americans are exposed to is increasing. Turn on the TV and you are bombarded by news about new threats, listen to the radio and you receive propaganda about in how much danger the country is in. You get a confusing color-coded system that is supposed to make you aware of what level of danger the country is in. The paranoia to possible dangers that may arise from terrorism has also now translated to increased background checks. Background check companies and employers have pushed the envelope on what justifies a disqualification for employment. The background companies claim they are trying to prevent terrorist from hiding in our country. They make these claims with an underlying message of fear…

We know where the suicide bombers come from. We know terrorists can get into the country. We know that other countries hide the pasts of people who immigrate to our country. The result of lax border security, an out of control immigration policy, and the unfortunate result of Sept 11, means that background checks have gone up.

However, the background checks are useless if the person that a company just hired-on got into the country illegally. The background checks that are pulled up are usually from a database that was put together by a state agency. The information that a background check company offers is useless if that person has immigrated from a country that does not keep records on it’s citizens such as Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Sudan, Nigeria, and many other countries from which people who immigrate to this country get a free pass. This problem of not knowing the past of people who are entering the country is a good reason why background checks do not work. Even with these flaws, background check companies continue their efforts, and they continue to bombard the public with a steady message of fear…

Thanks to Sept 11, we now live in a police state. This Sept 11 remember what was lost that day. We lost a lot more than buildings, we lost more that lives, we lost the one thing worth fighting for. We lost the one thing worth dyeing for. We lost our freedom!

Our prayers are that an event like Sept 11 is never seen again in our lifetime.
We hope our soldiers are allowed to finish the job, and that they too can return home some day.
Our hopes also go out to those who will be benefiting from the sealing of records, may they not forget our cause, and we hope they will help us get justice some day.

Kind thanks to all my readers,
Valente G www.deferredadjudication.org Web Maste

By Valente G.
September 10, 2003

Recently I had a talk with a representative from the Houston TFER, I find out that DA had affected some of his members, and because they were family domestic issues, they were ineligible to seal their records due to exclusions pertaining to certain crimes being ineligible for the sealing of records.

Unfortunately in Texas when a family member calls the Police, the police are required to arrest someone. Also to make matters worse the district attorney is required by law to press charges against one of the people involved with a family dispute, regardless of whether or not the person who called the police wants to press charges.

Most of the time the father is charged with a family dispute, because lazy district attorneys know it is easy to after the father instead of the mother. Whether right or wrong, it is the duty of the district attorney to meet his quota. Because of this, many fathers are convinced into accepting deferred adjudication. The district attorneys explain the definition of the law under article Art. 42.01 in a way to make people believe that there will be no repercussions. However; very soon after being placed on deferred adjudication the problem catches up to them. They are denied jobs, they start to fall behind in child support payments, they get denied apartment housing, they cannot be bonded or insured, and what’s worse is that the State of Texas expects them to make good on the child support. This scenario is too common. TFER is working to help correct the unequal unjust and unethical application of the law.
TFER
Advocates a Child’s right to have BOTH parents equally present in their lives. They deliver education and support centered on family rights and responsibilities. And they promote building healthy family systems.

Click Here to visit the Houston TFER site.

August 9, 2003
by K.C. Houston TX.
Discussions on how to implement SB 1477

Discussions on how to implement SB 1477 are going to be held in Harris County, other counties in Texas will also be discussing the issue of how to implement SB 1477 in the very near future (Sept 1, 2003)!

Recent information I received from a local government source here in Houston suggests that we will soon have procedural court and filing requirements for those anxiously waiting to pursue non disclosure using the upcoming changes to the law made possible by SB1477. As everyone knows SB 1477 was recently passed by the 78th Legislature, it will go into effect on September 1, 2003.

Currently, a “re-cap seminar” has been scheduled for August 13th through August 15th somewhere between county officials to discuss pro-active ways to effectively carry out court and administrative procedures. I did not get details on where that meeting would be, but it will be taking place very soon.

In addition, on Monday, August 18, the District Attorney for Harris County, along with District Attorneys from other counties within the state of Texas, will meet with the State Judicial Committee ( I do not know who they are), in Austin. They are expected to finalize the details of the procedures needed to facilitate the bill so that the public can be informed prior to the bill going into effect on September 3, 2003!

August 6, 2003
By Valente G.

Is deferred adjudication a contract? Are Texas employment agencies wrong, and can a legal case be brought up against them?

The argument is getting stronger urging everyone to pursue all avenues to get deferred adjudication cases before judges. There are some people who believe that deferred adjudication should be considered a breach of contract, here is some information that will be useful in launching a legal suit.

August 3, 2003
by Valente G.

Britain and spent convictions.

Does everyone know that in Britain unlike in the United States, a conviction has a limit on how much time it is allowed to affect an individual for purposes of discqualification. The United States used to have a provision in the FCRA that prevented criminal history from being reported past 7 years, but then in 1998, thanks to Bill Clinton and the FCRA Clarification Act of 1998, the FCRA was amended, and the section dealing with past crimes was removed, and with it, so were the protections against cruel and unusual punishment. (Don't take my word for it, check out these PDF's of web pages that talk about how Bill Clinton sold us out. ) Because the Clarification Act allows CRA's (Credit Reporting Agencies) to look past 7 years to see past offences, in insures that individuals will not be allowed reintegrate into public life. Prior to 1998 the United States did not allow records to be kept past 7 years, because it was against Federal Law. In contrast to the unjust practices of the United States, in Britain a conviction can be considered spent (People do not have to list it) if a certain amount of time has passed and an individual has not re offended.

According to http://www.scottishhumanrightscentre.org.uk/advice/rehaboff.asp regarding spent convictions.

What is a ‘spent’ conviction?
If a conviction is spent, it does not need to be mentioned if applying for employment, insurance, a hire-purchase or joining a club or trade union. However, there are certain jobs where a criminal record must be revealed, even if it is spent - eg. Doctors, lawyers, nurses, social workers etc.

Date: 7-27-03
From: Michael L. Wasson

Open Letter to the Readers :

Allow me to introduce myself, my name is Mike Wasson, I am 53 years old, I am a mechanic by trade and have been for 3 decades. I am a Vietnam veteran, Class of ’69 & ‘70; I now work for the City Of Houston. I have two children and four grandchildren, and I was born and raised in The Great State of Texas.

I have a particular dislike for folks telling me what I can and cannot do. Especially, when I feel that they either, do not have that right or they are seeking to deprive me of my right that is a constitutional guarantee. I consider myself to be a moderately, liberal, conservative. In other words, if you want my vote, then do what is right for me and my state. I feel that our Legislature has failed us over the last few years in as much as they are the ones that are ultimately responsible for the situation in which many good Texas folks find themselves today.

As I write this, I am working on making T.R.D.A. a legal corporation and as time and money permit we will grow into a credible and hopefully, powerful organization. I, like the other current directors of TRDA at this point, are funding the operation out of our own pockets. I am Not asking for donations ,and until I have the appropriate State and Federal permits and registration completed and filed, Will Not Accept donations. That in and of its self is going to make the process slow but everyone needs to understand that this is not a problem that came to be over night and it is not going to go away over night. We are engaging in what I consider a long and very protracted battle to make changes in state laws and corporate attitudes.

You as a reader of www.deferredadjuidcation.org can help yourself and the others by helping us spread the word. I am also working on a newsletter that I hope we can publish and email to everyone once a month that will keep you up to date on what we as a group want to do, or have done, and inform readers on whatever news statewide we may have gotten. I am going to ask, over the course of the next few months for your help, which we will greatly need, if we ever expect to come close to accomplishing what we are trying to do. I am also envisioning an online membership form that each our readers can fill out and return to us in the near future. I would love nothing better than to walk into the State House in 2005, in Austin and tell the folks there that I represent two or three million people in the state of Texas “that Vote”. Over and above the personal satisfaction of that, it will also give our group, more credibility with lawmakers and state Representatives.

I am not going to get into the details of what we need to do today, it is simply too long and drawn out to address here. I mainly want you, the people, our readers, who come to the website looking for DA information relief to know that others and I, believe that our efforts will pay off. We are optimistic about our success on this issue. I also want to stress the fact that we are not lawyers and any information that you get here is an opinion or the way I believe it to be. My friends and I, sincerely expect that no one take what we are saying as a qualified interpretation of the law without qualified legal counsel. I read the law without the benefit of a law degree. You can also benefit yourself by reading and understanding as much of the law as you can on your own. Valente, our webmaster, has done a great job here in providing a lot of information and links to sites of information which you need to take advantage of. You also need to tell your friends and family that this web page www.deferredadjudication.org is here, and have them tell their friends and so on.

In conclusion, let me say in the words of John Paul Jones “I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight”. We will carry this fight to The State House of The Governor, to the State Legislature, and on into the court system as time goes by, and we determine which is truly the best course of action.

Sincerely
Michael L. Wasson

Does this land of liberty allow a second chance?

Setting the record straight on deferred adjudication
By Senator Royce West (Author for SB 1477)
Click Here for Audio (Listen to Audio)

This session, I authored Senate Bill 1477, a bill that has generated considerable debate. Soon to become law, it will provide a great deal of relief - as well as a second chance - to possibly thousands of Texans.

Deferred adjudication has been part of Texas law for nearly 30 years, long before anything resembling the technology that we now see in the Internet age. The original intent was to give those charged with lesser crimes the opportunity to "wipe the slate clean" and make a fresh start. It gave judges and juries an alternative to incarceration, while still allowing for supervision before the individual is considered fully rehabilitated and the charges dismissed. As a result, defense has counseled clients for years that in accepting and completing a deferred judgment, their misdeeds would not create a permanent criminal record.

When deferred adjudication was originally introduced, only law enforcement agencies and select public entities had access to criminal records. Official records would list the criminal charge and the court's disposition, that being a dismissal in the case of a deferred adjudication ruling. Now we live in an age when private citizens can pull down and scrutinize another's criminal history at the press of a button. Those lacking the capability can, for a fee, enlist the services of an entire cottage industry that can scrutinize the arrest, charge and deferred adjudication records of any individual they wish to investigate.

Part of the challenge of moving into the electronic age is that we must constantly be mindful of the correct balance between the public's right to know, and the individual's right to privacy. Senate Bill 1477 will restore some common sense to the process.

For the record, I firmly believe that a person who commits a crime should be subject to the full array of sanctions possible under law. But a deferred adjudication is not a criminal conviction. That's the law. In my book, that means that someone who has successfully discharged a deferred sentence should be able to resume his or her life without the mark of a criminal record and without suffering the disadvantages that a conviction can bring to one's family life, one's career, one's future.

My office has fielded numerous calls from persons who have been denied access to rental properties and employment. During committee hearings on Senate Bill 1477, we heard testimony from an individual who had been denied life insurance for his children. This for an act committed more than ten years ago, for which he had successfully completed deferred adjudication and thus was not convicted.

Passage of Senate Bill 1477 involved intense negotiations with prosecutors and members of our law enforcement community in crafting a reasonable bill that would establish a fair balance between the public's right to safety and an individual's right not to be shackled for a crime that never resulted in a conviction. The legislation contains many changes recommended by those groups including provisions that prohibit the sealing of records for anyone charged with intoxication offenses such as driving while intoxicated or intoxication manslaughter, or anyone who has at any time been required to register as a sex offender. In addition, I worked closely with advocates against domestic violence so that the bill does not include those who have been charged with stalking, violating a protective order or other felony violations of laws protecting family members. People charged with crimes against children, the elderly or disabled are also not eligible.

Criminal justice agencies will have access to records sealed under SB1477, as will school districts. Persons who have been granted non-disclosure, but go on to commit a subsequent offense will not be able to hide deferred charges from a jury.

Perhaps the biggest guarantee that this bill is good public policy is the provision that, after the successful completion of a deferred sentence, the applicant must again present himself or herself before a court to request that their records be sealed.

The Legislature acted once, last session, to pass a similar bill reforming deferred adjudication. Senate Bill 1477 has now been approved by Governor Perry, having passed both chambers of the legislature by significant margins during the 78th Session. Clearly, this is a moderate, well-balanced measure that strikes a compromise between the public's right to know and the individual's right to privacy.

Welcome to www.deferredadjudcation.org and www.deferredadjudication.com

This page has been written to help expose the issues people are facing after completing deferred adjudication. Many people have found themselves in legal limbo because deferred adjudication is:

1. Not a conviction,
2. Because Dan Morales the state's former attorney general says in summary of Opinion No. DM-349 " because it is not a conviction that a person has no right to seek any type of legal relief, because that person “has no legal disabilities or disqualifications resulting from the deferred adjudication that are subject to remission by pardon.”
3. Because news organizations say it is not a conviction, and many people have the understanding that a deferred can be sealed or better yet, expunged.

Click here to check what we are talking about. Opinion DM-349, dated May 31, 1995

Disclaimer:
A lawyer is not providing this information to you; we are not lawyers, if you seek to truly understand the law surrounding a deferred adjudication then please contact a real lawyer. This information reflects the authors' views of the injustice of deferred adjudication in Texas. Click here for a legal understanding of deferred adjudication law from a real lawyers.

Home | Testimonials | Discussion Forum | Job Help | Contact Us | Help our cause

Expunge / Seal your Record

78 Legislative session Archive