Fill out the form below for
a free consultation

close

Request free consultation

Workplace Ergonomics: Tips to Staying Healthy at the Office

If you want results, call us. If you want peace of mind, call us. If you want representation who understands the hardship that has been thrust upon you, call us.

Request Free Consultation

Archive: Jan 2016

Workplace Ergonomics: Tips to Staying Healthy at the Office

Many jobs today require extensive periods of sitting and working in front of a screen. But studies show time and again just how bad this sedentary work arrangement is for our health. Humans were not meant to sit all day, but since most of us have to work for a living, we have to take a different approach to workplace health.

How Bad Is Sitting in Front of a Computer Screen?

Carpal tunnel, chronic back pain, headaches, and sciatica are just a few of the effects of sitting at a desk all day. Posture is a habit that often forms early in life, but even individuals with good posture droop their shoulders and round their backs during the workday. Over time, the practice pulls the spine out of alignment and weakens back and abdominal muscles.

Looking at a smartphone or squinting at a computer screen often brings the neck out of alignment, causing the head to pull forward in a condition that some physicians call “text neck.” The condition can cause lifelong problems if technology users aren’t aware and actively working against the temptation to constantly look down at a screen. Staring at a computer screen for too long at one time can cause strain, headaches, dry eye, and neck/shoulder pain.

While those conditions are irritating and can significantly reduce a worker’s quality of life, they aren’t as dangerous as the correlation between a sedentary lifestyle and an increased rate of death. Sitting for too long increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and fatality.

How Can I Reduce the Risks Associated With My Sedentary Job?

Employers have recognized the detrimental health effects associated with sitting at a desk all day, and many are willing to change. Some have invested in stand-up desks for workers to use throughout the day, and others are looking into using ergonomic equipment in the workplace per OSHA guidelines.

Ergonomics is the study of workplace efficiency and it can improve worker health in certain environments while also improving productivity. Relaxed and comfortable workers tend to be more efficient.

Here are a few ways you can enhance the ergonomics and health of your own workplace environment:

  • Talk to your supervisor about accommodations. If you’re uncomfortable at your workstation, ask a supervisor about getting an ergonomic chair or a different desk environment. All employers should be open to discussing workplace accommodations.
  • Take regular breaks. While you may not be able to grab a coffee and talk around the water cooler every hour, it’s a good idea to get up and stretch and move around for a few minutes. Give your mind, eyes, and body a break before diving back into the task at hand.
  • Adjust your workstation. Modify your seat so you can comfortably reach items on your desk and keyboard without straining. Place your monitor at a comfortable eye-level and adhere to the 20-20-20 rule.
  • Practice good posture. Set a timer on your computer or smartphone once a week for posture checks every 15 minutes. When the timer goes off, reorient your body. Roll your shoulders up and back, straighten your spine, and sit back into the seat of your chair. Your feet should sit uncrossed and flat on the floor.
  • Change positions. Sitting in one position all day will leave you feeling stiff. Change the way you sit often with small adjustments, and stretch your arms, wrists, and fingers throughout the day.
  • Practice breathing. Many of us breathe shallowly when we’re not actively focused on breathing. Take a few minutes throughout the day to focus on your breath. Breathe deeply and exhale fully to feel more alert and keep your circulation strong.
Read More

MUERTES EN CARCELES DE INMIGRACION Y SU ENCUBRIMIENTO DEBEN CASTIGARSE

Artículo 16-05

¡No Se Deje! ®

 

El intenso debate nacional sobre leyes de inmigración y la posible Reforma a la Ley de Inmigración es importante y necesario.  La Reforma Amplia de Inmigración con un proceso para que los inmigrantes indocumentados ganen la ciudadanía de EE.UU. tiene muchos simpatizantes y oponentes.  Aun los que apoyamos la Reforma Amplia de Inmigración entendemos que las personas tienen derecho a oponerse a las reformas y a trabajar para derrotarlas.

 

Sin embargo, algunas acciones son consideradas incorrectas en todo el mundo.  Toda persona decente estará de acuerdo que maltratar, abusar o ser negligente con las personas en custodia o negarles atención médica necesaria es incorrecto y debería ser castigado.  En este país se dice que “NADIE ESTA SOBRE LA LEY”.  Esto significa que QUIEN SEA que viole la ley debe ser tratado igual.  Los funcionarios gubernamentales no son la excepción.

 

La ACLU -American Civil Liberties Union- (en español Unión Americana de Libertades Civiles) y el periódico NEW YORK TIMES tomaron acción legal para obligar a Funcionarios de Inmigración a divulgar información acerca de las muertes de inmigrantes en custodia pendientes de deportación.   Documentos y registros oficiales revelaron que desde 2003 ha habido al menos 107 de estas muertes.   Anteriormente, el fallecimiento de inmigrantes en las cárceles migratorias no era contabilizado ni se identificaba a las víctimas.  Esto es ultrajante e imposible de justificar.

 

Reporteros periodísticos y abogados de ACLU que revisaron los registros y archivos del gobierno indican que es claro que los funcionarios gubernamentales actuaron para evitar investigaciones externas.  Un reporte del New York Times dice que “los documentos muestran como los funcionarios, algunos todavía en posiciones claves, usaron su posición como supervisores para encubrir evidencia de maltrato (de inmigrantes), desviar el escudriñamiento de los noticieros de la prensa o preparar declaraciones públicas de no-culpabilidad después de reunir hechos que señalaban cuidados inadecuados o abusos”.  Reportaron un caso en el cual empleados médicos de la cárcel falsificaron un reporte médico para indicar que le habían dado Motrín a un inmigrante Latino.  De hecho, el inmigrante había muerto antes de la fecha en que se reportó que le habían dado Motrín.

 

Además, la investigación revela que funcionarios de inmigración desarrollaron ciertas tácticas y procedimientos  engañosos para evitar el descubrimiento y divulgación de su mala conducta.  Estos funcionarios discutieron privadamente enviar a inmigrantes moribundos de regreso a sus países de origen o entregarlos a sus familiares en este país para evitar el costo de proveerles tratamiento médico.  Esto es particularmente ofensivo dado que la enfermedad y las lesiones fueron contraídas estando en las cárceles de inmigración.  Limitaciones de espacio no me permiten revelar los detalles repugnantes de muchísimas más muertes trágicas, innecesarias e injustificadas en las manos de empleados y funcionarios gubernamentales.  Una de estas muertes incluyó a un barbero de 62 años de edad que vino a este país en 1972 y había sido residente permanente por 33 años.  Fue arrestado por funcionarios de inmigración por una condena de 1979 por una ofensa de agresión menor y robo menor.  Era diabético y tenía alta presión sanguínea. Murió mientras permanecía en la cárcel de inmigración.

 

Los detalles de cada una de estas muertes deben ser investigados exhaustivamente. Es importante notar que la ley Civil dispone “Justa Compensación” por la muerte causada por la negligencia de otra persona. Ciertas conductas obligan a los empleados y al gobierno a compensar a las víctimas pagando fuertes cantidades de dinero en casos de fallecimiento. Y, muchos de los actos impropios también pueden constituir crímenes. NADIE ESTA SOBRE LA LEY.  ¡NO SE DEJE! ®

 

JESS J. ARAUJO, ABOGADO

Read More

Immigration Jail Deaths And Cover-Ups Must Be Punished

Article 16-05

¡No Se Deje!

The intense national debate about immigration law and possible Immigration Law Reform is important and necessary.  Comprehensive Immigration Reform with a process for earning U. S. citizenship by undocumented immigrants has many supporters and opponents.  Even those of us that support Comprehensive Immigration Reform understand that people have a right to oppose reform and to work to defeat it.

 

Some acts however, are universally considered wrong.  All decent people should agree that mistreating, abusing or neglecting people in custody or denying needed medical attention is wrong and should be punished.  In this country it is said that “NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW”.  This means that EVERYONE who violates the law must be treated the same.  Government officials are no exception.

 

The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and the NEW YORK TIMES took legal action to force Immigration Officials to disclose information about the deaths of immigrants in custody pending deportation.  Official documents, records and reports reveal that since 2003 there have been at least 107 such deaths.  Prior to 2003, the deaths of immigrants in immigration jails were not counted nor the victims identified.  This is outrageous and impossible to justify.  In 2008, newspaper reporters were told that very little information was available about who the victims were or how they died.

 

Newspaper reporters and ACLU attorneys that reviewed the government files and records indicate that it is clear that government officials acted to avoid outside investigations.  A New York Times report states that “documents show how officials-some still in key positions-used their roles as overseers to cover up evidence of mistreatment (of immigrants), deflect scrutiny by the news media or prepare exculpatory public statements after gathering facts that pointed to substandard care or abuse”.  They reported one case in which jail medical employees falsified the medical report to indicate that one Latino immigrant had been given Motrin.  In fact, the immigrant had died before the date the Motrin was reported given.

 

To make matters worse, the investigation reveals that immigration officials developed several deceptive tactics and procedures to avoid detection and publicity about their misconduct.  These officials privately discussed sending dying immigrants back to their native countries or releasing them to family members in this country to avoid the cost of providing medical treatment.  This is especially offensive since the illnesses and injuries were contracted or suffered while in immigration jails.  Space limitations do not permit me to reveal the sickening details of so many more disgraceful, unnecessary and unjustified deaths at the hands of government officials and employees.  One such death involved a 62 year old barber who came to this country in 1972 and had been a legal permanent resident for 33 years.  He was arrested by immigration officials for a 1979 conviction for a minor battery offense and petty theft.  He was a diabetic and had high blood pressure.  He died in immigration jail.

 

The details of each of these deaths must be thoroughly investigated.  The Civil law provides for “Just Compensation” for wrongful death.  And, many of the improper acts revealed may also constitute crimes. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.  ¡NO SE DEJE! ®

 

JESS J. ARAUJO, ESQ.

Read More

Workers’ Compensation in the United States and Europe

The history of workers’ compensation in the western world started in 19th century Europe with the advent of industrialization. Germany was the first to introduce a legal doctrine for employer liability, followed by Switzerland and England. The US didn’t enact its first workers’ compensation laws until the early 20th century. The last state to enact workers’ compensation laws (Mississippi) did so in 1948—more than 75 years after Europe’s first legislation was introduced. Since US workers’ compensation laws have been heavily influence by Europe, here’s a brief comparison:

Two Approaches to Workers’ Compensation

Workers’ compensation laws in Europe vary by country. They fall generally into two categories: Bismarckian and Beveridgean. Bismarckian workers’ compensation systems are based on employer contribution to the insurance program. Beveridgean systems are financed through taxes. Eastern Europe primarily follows the Bismarckian approach, whereas the UK and southern European countries such as Italy, Portugal, and the Scandinavian countries lean more towards the Beveridgean approach.

The US approach to workers’ compensation at the federal and state level descends largely from the Bismarckian approach.

Similarities and Differences Between Workers’ Compensation in the US and Europe

  • Injury and illness coverage. In most European countries and in the US, all occupational injuries are covered under workers’ compensation insurance. Occupational illness coverage varies slightly from country to country but generally requires some form of proof that the illness was caused from a workplace hazard. Most European countries have a set list of occupational-related illnesses associated with workplace hazards. The US has a list of common occupational illnesses, but any American employee who can prove a direct association between an illness and the workplace can typically secure benefits.
  • Commute-related accidents. The treatment of commute-related accidents is a notable difference between most European countries and the US. Aside from the UK and Denmark, most European countries compensate employees injured in transit to and from work.
  • Fault and the extent of coverage. In both the US and Europe, coverage is provided regardless of fault, and most claims compensate employees for economic loss (medical expenses and living costs) rather than non-economic loss, such as pain and suffering.
  • Public vs. private insurance. Another significant difference is the source of insurance. In the US, insurance is provided either directly through the employer or through a private insurance provider. The federal and state governments dictate terms for workers’ compensation but leave the actual insurance policy purchasing to the employer. In many European countries, public organizations control workers’ compensation insurance policies. Depending on the country, the national government or a regional/local government may control public insurance.

Workers’ Compensation in Practice

While the concepts of workers’ compensation are generally very similar in most Western countries, the rate of actual compensation varies widely. In a report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2011, the United States ranked below countries including Sweden, Belgium, France, Italy, Austria, and Spain.

In Europe, each workers’ compensation program exists at a national level. Regardless of the system approach, all employers must abide by the legislation. In the US, however, our federal and state laws vary widely. Federal laws cover government employees and tend to offer comprehensive coverage after an accident or illness.

State laws, on the other hand, have a history of benefit inconsistency and injustice. Each state has a different set of laws, and some put the majority of injury and illness costs on the shoulders of injured workers. Some reform proponents believe a public health model could remedy the vast differences between federal and state healthcare.

For further questions regarding California’s workers’ compensation laws after an injury or illness, contact the skilled legal team at DiMarco Araujo Montevideo today.

Read More

LAS LEYES DE CALIFORNIA ESTÁN CONTRA LAS RELACIONES SEXUALES ILÍCITAS

Artículo 16-04

¡No Se Deje! ®

Muchos inmigrantes llegan de países donde las leyes, y costumbres son diferentes a las leyes de Estados Unidos. Esto podría ser especialmente confuso en los casos que involucran relaciones sexuales con menores de edad. Los inmigrantes deberían asegurarse en conocer la ley que se les aplicará a ellos y a sus conductas, si mantienen relaciones sexuales con menores, que en California son definidos como una persona menor de 18 años de edad. Los varones menores de edad también son protegidos bajo la ley; las mujeres también pueden ser agresoras.

La sección 261.5 del Código Penal establece que es considerado ilícito tener relaciones sexuales con una persona menor de edad si no es su cónyuge. Si la diferencia de edades entre las partes es menos de 3 años, el crimen es un delito menor (misdemeanor).  Si los jóvenes son 3 años menores que el agresor, el caso puede ser registrado ya sea como un delito menor o un delito mayor (felony). Si el joven tiene menos de 14 años, el caso es generalmente registrado como un crimen de inmoralidad sexual con menores (child molestation). Esta parte de la ley usualmente trata sobre menores de 14, 15, 16, o 17 años de edad. El castigo aumenta cuando  la edad de la víctima disminuye.

Cualquier persona de 21 años de edad o más, que participe en una relación sexual ilícita con jóvenes de 16 años o menores, es culpable ya sea de un crimen menor (misdemeanor) o de un crimen mayor (felony). En este caso, el castigo puede ser ya sea  un año como máximo en una cárcel del condado o la reclusión en una prisión del estado por dos, tres, o cuatro años. Y, quien sea condenado por tener una relación sexual ilícita con menores debe ser registrado como un delincuente sexual por el resto de su vida.

Un adulto que tiene relaciones sexuales ilícitas con jóvenes que sean 2 años menores que él, podría ser responsable hasta por $2,000.00 en multas. Si los jóvenes son menores más de 2 años de edad, la penalidad es de $5,000.00 y si los jóvenes son menores más de 3 años,  la penalidad es de $10,000.00. Si el agresor tiene al menos 21 años de edad y los jóvenes tienen menos de 16 años, la penalidad es de $25,000.00.

En una reunión que tuve con el Fiscal del Condado de Orange, Tony Rackauckas y dos de sus principales Fiscales Asistentes, ellos indicaron que, en los casos que involucran familias Latinas, los sentimientos, opiniones y preferencias de las familias se consideran importantes con respecto a  registrar cargos criminales.  Aún así, los fiscales urgen a los padres y a las familias a tomar acciones que no permitan relaciones sexuales ilícitas hasta que el menor sea adulto o exista un matrimonio legal.

Es importante notar que cuando un adulto es mucho mayor que un menor o cuando el adulto está en una posición de confianza como un pastor, sacerdote, ministro, doctor o consejero, los intereses de la sociedad y de las partes son mejor atendidas con el uso del sistema de la justicia criminal. Castigar a los que violan nuestras leyes, que están basadas en nuestros valores, contribuye a desanimar conductas similares de los criminales culpables y de otros. Esto también provee protección a los beneficiarios directos de esta ley, los menores y sus familias, las víctimas de relaciones sexuales ilícitas. ¡NO SE DEJE! ®

JESS J. ARAUJO, ABOGADO

Read More

California Laws Against Unlawful Sexual Intercourse

Article 16-04

¡No Se Deje!

Many immigrants come from countries where the laws, customs, are significantly different from our Federal and State laws.  This can be especially confusing in cases involving sexual relations with a minor.  Immigrants should make sure to know the law that will be applied to them, and their conduct, if they are having sexual relations with a minor, which is defined in California as, a person less than 18 years of age.  Male minors are also protected under the law and women can also be perpetrators.

Penal Code section 261.5 states that it is considered unlawful sexual intercourse to have sexual relations with a minor who is not the spouse of the perpetrator.  If the age difference between the parties is less than 3 years, the crime is a misdemeanor.  If the minor is more than 3 years younger than the perpetrator, the case can be filed as either a misdemeanor or a felony.  This law usually involves minors who are 14, 15, 16, or 17 years old.  If the minor is less than 14 years old, the case is usually filed as a child molestation crime.  The punishment increases as the age of the minor decreases.

Any person 21 years of age or older, who engages in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who is less than 16 years old, is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony.  In this case, the punishment can be either not more than one year confinement in a county jail or confinement in state prison for two, three, or four years.  And, anyone convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor must register as a sex offender for the rest of his or her life.

An adult, who has unlawful sexual relations with a minor less than two years younger, could be liable for up to $2,000.  If the minor is more than two years younger the penalty is $5,000 and if the minor is more than three years younger the penalty is $10,000.  If the perpetrator is at least 21 years old and the minor is less than 16 years old, the penalty is $25,000.

I met with Orange County District Attorney, Tony Rackauckas and two of his senior Assistant District Attorneys. They indicated that, in cases involving Latino families, the feelings, opinions, and preferences of the families are considered important and do often influence the decision regarding filing criminal charges.  Even in this situation, prosecutors urge the parents and family to take steps to ensure that unlawful sexual relations are not allowed until the minor becomes an adult or there is a lawful marriage.

It is important to note that when an adult is much older than the minor or when the adult is in a position of trust such as a pastor, priest, minister, doctor or counselor, the interests of society and of the parties are best served by use of the criminal justice system.  Punishing those that violate our laws, which are based on our values, helps to discourage similar conduct by the convicted criminal and others.  It also provides protection for the intended beneficiaries of this law, minors and their families, the victims of unlawful sexual intercourse. ¡NO SE DEJE! ®

JESS J. ARAUJO, ESQ.

Read More

LOS LATINOS Y EL SISTEMA LEGAL DE ESTADOS UNIDOS.

Artículo 16-02

¡No Se Deje! ®

Después de practicar la ley por más de 30 años, algunas veces me he sentido frustrado en mis esfuerzos por representar agresivamente a los clientes Latinos debido a que muchos se resisten a hacer todo lo que sea posible para ganar. Pronto me di cuenta que nuestra noble y respetable cultura Latina nos ha inculcado patrones de conducta que nos pone en desventaja en el sistema legal de Estados Unidos que es agresivo, combativo, y a menudo hostil. Cuando surge una disputa legal, cada parte, para ganar, debe derrotar los reclamos de la parte contraria. Esto significa que para que una parte gane la otra debe perder. Las víctimas que toman acción inmediata y buscan consejo legal tienen más probabilidades de triunfar.

Nuestra cultura latina contiene mucho de lo cual debemos estar justamente orgullosos. Como comunidad, y como sociedad, los Latinos somos muy trabajadores, disciplinados y responsables y enfrentamos la adversidad con coraje, paciencia, y firmeza. Los Latinos somos adiestrados a soportar dificultades extremas con dignidad y raramente nos quejamos. Todos estos valores y cualidades que ayudan a que los Latinos tengan una vida honorable y feliz también los vuelven resistentes a hacer cosas que pueden ayudarles a utilizar exitosamente el sistema legal de Estados Unidos. Los siguientes son algunos ejemplos que ilustran mis conclusiones:

En los casos de accidentes de auto, los Latinos tienen tanto cuidado para no ofender a la parte contraria que a menudo no hacen valer el hecho que la otra parte causó el accidente y no piden toda la información necesaria. Generalmente los Latinos aceptan no llamar a la policía o no requerir un reporte policiaco que adjudica la culpa y nombra a los testigos. Muy frecuentemente las víctimas no van al hospital o al doctor aún cuando están lesionados y tienen dolor. Y, muy frecuentemente las víctimas esperan demasiado tiempo antes de llamar a un abogado que los represente contra los responsables de sus lesiones. Cuando se les pregunta por qué esperaron tanto tiempo para buscar asistencia legal, la respuesta más común es “la desidia”. En este país, esperar demasiado tiempo para registrar un reclamo o demanda puede impedir por siempre hacerlo.

En los casos de accidentes y lesiones en el trabajo, los Latinos son reacios a registrar reclamos de beneficios porque creen que el empleador los despedirá o tomará otro tipo de represalias contra ellos. Es contra la ley despedir a un empleado que registra un reclamo de compensación al trabajador si se lesiona en el trabajo. Registrar un reclamo no es ser desleal y los patrones en California no pueden hacer lo que quieran contra los empleados de este país.

Como Latinos, creemos que debemos pagar nuestras deudas y que no es honroso negarse a pagarlas. En el sistema legal de Estados Unidos, no pagar algunas deudas es legalmente permitido y se considera que es un uso astuto y efectivo de la ley. Por ejemplo, la ley Federal de Bancarrota permite la cancelación legal de deudas enormes y los mejores abogados pelean por reducir aún los cobros legítimos de hospitales y médicos para que las víctimas de accidentes puedan recibir más dinero. Esto es usar apropiadamente la ley y es honesto en casos legales. Su adversario lo hará, por lo tanto usted también debe hacerlo.

Si usted cree que ha sido perjudicado, tome acción inmediata para obtener asesoría y representación legal. Siga los consejos de su abogado. No deje que las tradiciones culturales y sociales le impidan actuar rápidamente para hacer valer y proteger sus derechos. En fin…¡ NO SE DEJE! ®

JESS J. ARAUJO, ABOGADO

Conozca al Abogado

Read More

Latinos and The American Legal System

Article 16-02
¡No Se Deje!

After practicing law for over 30 years, I have at times been frustrated in my efforts to aggressively represent Latino clients because of their resistance to do everything possible to win. I soon determined that our noble and respectable Latino culture often instilled in us standards of conduct that placed us at a disadvantage in the aggressive, combative, and often hostile American legal system. When a legal dispute arises, each party must defeat the claims of the other party to succeed. This means that for one party to win, the other must lose. Victims that take immediate action and seek legal advice are much more likely to prevail.

Our Latino culture provides much for us to be proud of. As a community, and as a society, Latinos are hard working, disciplined, and dependable and face adversity with courage, patience, and resolve. Latinos are taught to endure extreme hardship with dignity and rarely complain. All of these values and qualities that help Latinos live honorable and content lives also make them reluctant to do the things that can help them use the American legal system successfully. The following are just a few examples that illustrate my conclusions:

In auto accident cases, Latinos are often so careful not to offend the other party that they often fail to assert that the other party caused the accident and to ask for all of the necessary information. Latinos often agree not to call the police or to request a police report that assigns fault and lists witnesses. Too often victims fail to go to the hospital or to the doctor even when they are injured and in pain. And, too often victims wait entirely too long before calling an attorney to represent them against the party that caused their injuries. When asked why they waited so long to seek legal assistance, the most common response is “la decidia” (carelessness, negligence). In this country, waiting too long to file a claim or lawsuit can permanently bar you from doing so.

In cases of accidents and injuries at work, Latinos are often reluctant to file a claim for benefits because they think that the employer will fire them or retaliate against them in other ways. It is against the law to fire an employee for filing a worker’s compensation claim if injured at work. Filing a claim is not being disloyal and employers in California cannot do anything that they want against employees in this country.

As Latinos, we believe that we must pay our bills and that it is not honorable to fail or refuse to pay them. In the American legal system, legally avoiding paying certain bills is not only permitted but is considered astute and effective use of the law. For example, Federal Bankruptcy law permits the lawful cancellation of enormous amounts of debt and the best accident attorneys make it a point to reduce even legitimate hospital and medical bills so that the accident victims can keep more money. It is proper use of the law and it is honorable. Your adversary will do it and you should too.

If you feel that you have been wronged, take immediate action and get legal advice and representation. Follow your attorney’s advice. Do not let cultural and social traditions stop you from acting quickly to assert and protect your rights. ¡ NO SE DEJE! ®

JESS J. ARAUJO, ESQ.

Meet the Attorney

Read More

5 New Laws That Will Affect Your Commute This Year

The New Year has really only just begun. And as of Jan 1st there were several new traffic-related laws in California covering everything from Hover boards, hit and runs and drunk driving. Thankfully the DMV and California Highway Patrol provided a nice roundup of the new laws, which are mostly designed to increase traffic safety. These following five laws are likely to affect your daily commute.

 

  1. Hit-and-run: – A “Yellow Alert” notification system has been established as of January 1, 2016, for specified hit-and-run incidents resulting in death or serious injury. As with AMBER, Silver, or Blue Alerts, the CHP will work with requesting law enforcement agencies to determine whether the hit-and-run meets the criteria for a Yellow Alert, including the use of the freeway

 

  1. Driving Under the Influence: if you are convicted of DUI you will have to install and Ignition Interlock Device (IID) in your vehicle for a minimum of five months and up to 36 months depending on the number of DUI convictions.

 

  1. Highway lane use:  The law requiring slow-moving passenger vehicles to pull over safely to let traffic pass has been amended to apply to all vehicles, effective January 1, 2016. Bicycles will now be included in the legal requirement that slow-moving vehicles use the next available turnout or other area to let backed-up traffic – five or more vehicles – get by.

 

  1. Earbuds and Headphones: it is now unlawful to wear earbuds or headphones while driving a motor vehicle or bicycle. Drivers protecting their ears while operating construction or emergency vehicles are excluded. No more jamming in your car with your headphones!

 

  1. Electrically Motorized Skateboards: restricts “hoverboards” from being used on public facilities. Hoverboards may not be operated under the influence drugs or alcohol or a fine of up to $250 may be assessed.

The personal Injury attorneys at DiMarco Araujo Montevideo wish you a Safe 2016 on the roads.

Read More

NO ES ILEGAL SOCORRER A INMIGRANTES DICE JUEZ FEDERAL

Artículo 16-01

¡No Se Deje! ®

Shanti Sellz y Daniel Strauss fueron al desierto de Arizona para proveer agua, alimentos y asistencia médica a inmigrantes necesitados. Ambos son miembros del grupo “Samaritans” de la organización “No More Deaths” o “No Más Muertes”.  Estas organizaciones se dedican a reducir las trágicas muertes de inmigrantes en la frontera por falta de recursos básicos.  Sellz y Strauss encontraron a cinco inmigrantes y  determinaron que dos de ellos estaban en graves condiciones y sufriendo de deshidratación. Sus médicos dieron instrucciones de llevarlos al hospital de inmediato.

 

Camino al hospital, agentes del Servicio de Inmigración de Los Estados Unidos los arrestaron.  El procurador federal registró acusaciones penales en contra de ellos por sus actividades a favor de los inmigrantes. Ambos se declararon “no culpables”. Strauss declaró públicamente “no hemos cometido ningún delito”.

 

El juez federal Raner Collins, concluyó el caso penal a favor de los acusados.  Se cancelaron los cargos por completo y  Sellz y Strauss quedaron libres y con la confianza de continuar su noble tarea sin impedimentos legales.  El juez determinó que el grupo “Samaritans” en efecto sí es una organización humanitaria, confirmando el argumento legal del Lic. Bill Walker quien se unió con Stanley Feldman para defender a los socorristas sin cobro alguno.

 

Este fallo federal además indicó que “No More Deaths” no se dedica a ayudar a los inmigrantes a entrar al país ilegalmente.  Esto es sumamente importante porque mucha gente que desea ayudar a los inmigrantes necesitados no lo hace por temor a que es contra la ley.  El Lic. Walker declaró “esta decisión jurídica es un enorme triunfo para todos aquellos que quieren eliminar las muertes innecesarias en el desierto”.    El reverendo John Fife, fundador del grupo Samaritans, declaró que el juez federal afirmó la posición básica del grupo, que “la ayuda humanitaria nunca es contra la ley”.  Ahora, todos pueden cumplir con su conciencia y proveer asistencia humanitaria sin temer consecuencias o castigos legales.

 

 

 

Es necesario reconocer que ni el juez federal Raner Collins, ni los dos abogados defensores, Bill Walker y Stanley Feldman, ni los activistas Sellz y Strauss, son Latinos. Tampoco es Latino el reverendo John Fife, fundador del grupo Samaritans.  Existe un creciente movimiento social, político, y humanitario, para apoyar a los inmigrantes.  Este movimiento fomenta la amnistía migratoria, licencias de manejar, la educación y la atención médica para todo ser humano sin importar su estado migratorio.  Muchos de los participantes en este movimiento no son Latinos.  Lo que se pretende no se trata de nacionalismo, se trata de hacer lo que es justo y necesario en el ámbito humanitario.

 

El caso de Sellz y Strauss es importante porque afirma como principio legal que todavía se permite salvar las vidas de los que han entrado al país aún sin permiso o documentos.  Qué triste, que en Los Estados Unidos hoy día, fue necesario litigar en una corte penal por más de un año para saberlo.  ¡NO SE DEJE! ®

 

JESS J. ARAUJO, ABOGADO

Read More