Officers from various law enforcement agencies around the county are complaining that Harris County DA Kim Ogg is too lenient on criminals. They complain that the Assistant DA’s in the Intake division are refusing to accept legitimate cases because of their distrust of officers.
Here is an example of a case where the Intake ADA refused to accept charges.
I redacted all of the identifying information. You can scroll through the gallery at the top of the page to see the drugs and paraphernalia that the officers found.
The individual that is referenced in the report as the homeowner has the following previous criminal record in Harris County:
| Date | Charge | Judgement |
|---|---|---|
| 9/17/2005 | Poss, Marijuana, 2-4 oz | 60 days county jail |
| 1/21/2006 | Evade arrest motor vehicle | 2 yrs deferred adjudication, 12 months state jail |
| 6/24/2007 | Poss, Marijuana, < 2 oz | 18 days county jail |
| 6/24/2007 | Poss, CS < 28 grams (Xanax) | 18 days county jail |
| 6/28/2010 | Poss, CS w/Intent to distribute | combined with plea bargain on 10/30/2010 |
| 6/28/2010 | Poss, Marijuana, 4 oz – 5 lbs | combined with plea bargain on 10/30/2010 |
| 10/30/2010 | Poss, Marijuana, 4 oz – 5 lbs | 14 months state jail |
| 1/15/2015 | Poss, Marijuana, < 2 oz | 20 days county jail |
| 2/9/2015 | Poss, Marijuana, < 2 oz | 20 days county jail |
| 12/11/2015 | Poss, Marijuana, < 2 oz | 30 days county jail |
I don’t know if he has a record outside of Harris County.
As for the subject of the warrant, she is wanted for violation of probation. She was on probation for burglary of a vehicle and abuse of the elderly, a female over 65.
I certainly am not qualified to comment on the law. I’ve asked several people that are qualified to review the case. All say that the officers had probable cause to be there and to enter the garage because of the call from dispatch. One said that he didn’t think probable cause existed for the large bag of weed because it was in a closet, even though the closet door was open and the weed was in plain view.
Again, I don’t know. Obviously, I supported Ms. Ogg for DA very strongly and think that for the most part she has kept her campaign promises and I certainly do not think that she is “anti-police”. I do wonder if the attitude around the office is such that the ADA’s are nervous and are lining up on the side of the suspected criminals because of that. I think it is a question that Ms. Ogg needs to ask to make certain that the law abiding citizens are protected.
Regardless of our opinions on the legalization of marijuana, it is still very much against the law in Texas, especially in these amounts. Would you want this type of activity occurring in the driveway next to yours?
Kim Ogg is a pro-pot, anti-death penalty uber-liberal and that surely does not make her pro-police!
As for the closet, the door was half-way open, but the officer did not see the marijuana until he went inside. He did not say the closet emitted an odor of pot and the marijuana inside was not in plain sight. Thus he had no probable cause for entering the closet without a search warrant or permission of a person in legal charge of the premises.
This is clearly a case of persons involved in the distribution of marijuana. Except for the marijuana in the closet, this was a righteous seizure. Shame, shame on the district attorney’s office for refusing to file any charges.
Howie, perhaps the officer should have used the term “storage cabinet” instead of closet. This isn’t a walk-in closet, it is one of those storage cabinets that people (like me) have in their garages. One of the two doors was open, the weed was in plain view of anyone in the garage.
You are absolutely right David, but the officer said, “I noticed a closet door halfway open and when I looked inside,” which would indicate the large bag of marijuana was not in plain view.
This illustrates the importance of good police report writing, something not evident in this case.
Instead of writing, “Dispatch informed me that they received an anonymous call …..,,” the report should have read, “I was dispatched to (address) to serve a felony warrant for (name of wanted person).”
I know the old line of smelling weed as probable cause for a search and then the old in plain sight, its LEO 101. If the man in question didnt have such an extensive record I would likely side with Ogg. Does HPD or the SO wear body cams? If so I would love to see it. Any neighbors complain about the smell?
Kim is NOT anti-cop. What she is big on is the authorities following the law.
I can’t tell from the facts set out in the officer’s narrative but if the defendant was my client, I would be screaming bloody murder over a warrantless intrusion into a home without exigent circumstances. I don’t see any here but I don’t have all of the facts.
Remember, the Supreme Court has said that the Fourth Amendment prohibits only unreasonable searches and warrantless searches are unreasonable unless they fall into a specific exception to the warrant requirement like search incident to arrest or a warrantless search of a motor vehicle if there is sufficient probable cause to get a warrant.
Cops for years have been screaming every time an assistant district attorney at intake refuses charges. Intake was created in the 1970s to keep crap cases out of the system. It appears from this “narrative” that the ADA considered the legality of the search and determined the officer lacked exigent circumstances.
The Supreme Court also has held that just having an arrest warrant does not give the authorities to enter a residence other than the residence of the person named in the warrant. Getting a tip from an unnamed source to a dispatcher that someone with an open warrant is at someone else’s home isn’t sufficient to allow the police to search the third person’s property. If they had seen 10 kilos of cocaine on the kitchen table, the result should have been the same.
The bottom line is that the constitution, that pesky document, has a preference for searches and arrests approved by neutral judges rather than allowing the police to act on their own.
But Tom, didn’t they have a warrant? Admittedly, not a warrant to search for pot, but they could have entered the garage “to look for the subject of the arrest warrant”, noticed the drugs in plain view, and proceeded from there. It’s not like they were opening drawers where the suspect couldn’t possibly hide as part of a fishing expedition, the garage was big enough to hold the suspect and the drugs were in plain view. Am I missing something?
As for not being allowed to enter a residence that wasn’t the residence of the person named in the warrant, isn’t that the address they were at? Does it really matter if the subject of the warrant, or the subject’s sister, or the subject’s sister’s boyfriend owns the home if the home is listed as the residence of the suspect?
Never mind. I just read the arrest report for the third time, and saw that the only reason they tried to serve the warrant was because of the anonymous tip. You are correct, they had no legal reason to enter the home.
Jeff: remember, an arrest warrant does NOT give the police the authority to enter a third party’s residence. There are 50,000 plus open felony warrants at the Harris County Sheriff’s Office. Under the rule the officer wanted in this case, any of those warrants plus a “tip” that any of those 50,000 warrants would support an entry and search of YOUR house..
That’s not the law.
Amen!
Leaving aside the larger question of Kim Ogg’s fondness of police, there was most certainly probable cause for the arrest. The garage was open, the cabinet was open, the air smelled of drugs and the totality of circumstances support everything the officers did given the drugs were in plain view. If the police report left any wiggle room open, that might be grounds for a hearing later but only someone representing such drug distributors would be willing to bend over backwards far enough to view each piece of information independently and as contrary to common logic as some here have.
The rumors surrounding Ms. Ogg’s anti-police status do not come from a single case however, the overall trend is what concerns some people. With Intake taking so exceptionally critical a look at all cases coming in, many perfectly solid cases are falling through the cracks, the ADA playing devil’s advocate to such an extent that one would be hard pressed to find a sitting judge nearly as critical. Then there is the matter of felony bonds for wonderful citizens engaged in armed robbery being set so low, the refusal of ADA’s to request interlock devices on multiple offender DWI suspects, and a wealth of other changes that cause concern for police. The DA is even trying to shame smaller police agencies into following her stance on pot that have long used the cite and release law the legislature approved some years back, apparently the class C charge is not to her liking when small amounts of drugs are found.
Overall, I think Ms. Ogg’s tenure as DA is proving very acceptable to liberal democrats, extremist libertarians, and legal mercenaries that represent criminals but whether you think she’s an improvement over the last DA or not, no one should be confusing her stances as anything close to conservative or pro-law enforcement.
Peter: First, I am a criminal defense attorney, I represent citizens accused of committing crimes. I am not a legal mercenary representing criminals. I also am a citizen and I have been a Republican in Texas since it was a felony.
Peoples’ homes have the highest protection from searches. It almost always requires a warrant based on probable cause to get into someone’s home. That dates back to the English common law holding a man’s home was his castle. Presuming the officers in this case had probable cause, and I will so presume for the sake of argument, they could secure the scene and apply for a search warrant from a judge.
Writs of assistance, that is general warrants allowing the authorities to search anyone’s home, were a major complaint of the founding fathers in 1776. That’s why we have a Fourth Amendment prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures both of people and property.
Judges like the late Antonin Scalia were strict on requiring warrants to search homes. Justice Scalia wrote opinions saying it took a warrant to use technical tools to check temperatures inside homes to determine if marijuana was growing inside and to bring a drug sniffing dog to the front door. Few people would consider Justice Scalia a liberal but he was proud of his Fourth Amendment warrant opinions.
As for Ms. Ogg being anti-police, she like all prosecutors has a duty to see that justice is done. Is justice done if prosecutors file charges they thing cannot be sustained in court, take a person into custody, make him pay to post a bond or rot in jail for months awaiting disposition of his case only to have the state lose in the trial court? I don’t think so. Prosecutors at intake have a duty to determine if they think the case can be made and if not, to refuse to accept charges.
As for your other complaints against Kim, let’s talk about them. You complain that she sets bonds too low and fails to request ignition interlock devices on defendants with multiple DWIs. Those are decisions made by judges, not prosecutors. Furthermore, requiring an interlock on a car used by an indigent person as a condition of bond may very well be unconstitutional.
Her marijuana policy isn’t that controversial among law enforcement leaders. If cities want to cite people with less than 2 ounces of marjjuana with possession of paraphernalia. she has no control over that. Class C misdemeanors are filed in municipal court by the city attorney.
Having said all that, Tom, it does not change the fact that Ogg is of the uber-left political persuasion.
I think Justice Scalia would not have overturned the garage entry. The circumstances were exigent because securing the scene while awaiting a warrant would not have prevented the destruction of evidence.
Tom, to address your misconceptions one by one in detail would take longer than I care but here’s a few points to ponder. First, I don’t advocate an elected DA pander to the specialized demands of law enforcement but that wasn’t the question posed by our host.
Second, given the circumstances of this specific case, I believe it would have passed any hearing in a Harris County court and then on appeals, your fine speech aside.
Third, few counties in Texas bother with even having an intake process but the current DA has chosen to go well beyond what is demanded by installing a process that is not about whether a case can be made so much as if a case is a guaranteed slam dunk. If that is your standard as a “Republican”, I suggest you are more of a RINO if at all conservative but the label legal mercenary seems even more fitting given your willingness to bend over backwards for the criminal element.
Fourth, an ADA that agrees with lowering bonds on career criminals instead of presenting a solid case for keeping such bonds high or one that doesn’t at least request an interlock device on a multi time DWI offender is indeed soft on criminals, defense lawyers try to convince lowering requirements while the state is supposed to maintain some standard, not rubber stamp requests so that judges feel like something is wrong with a case. Rather than argue the exception as the rule, argue the more likely example of defendants who can easily afford such devices if you want credibility.
Fifth, given the law enforcement “leaders” most quoted are both among the most liberal of their kind around, one a life long democrat and the other established as a liberal hack, both of whom make their officers jump through hoops when it comes to illegals for example, citing them as not being controversial flies in the face of conservative leaders. And the comment regarding the cite and release program by small towns was based on the fact that Ms. Ogg was trying to pressure said towns into using her program instead of writing tickets, you can read all about it in the Comical.
Peter D: To continue our conversation about misconceptions, the Intake Division of the DA’s office was created about 1973 by DA Carol Vance and retained by every DA since including Johnny Holmes. Vance created it to keep lousy cases out of the system.
Second, it is both unethical and frankly sloppy for a district attorney to prosecute a case he doesn’t think he can make. It is an abuse of power to lock someone up for months awaiting trial knowing you can’t make the case.
As for a warrantless search of a house passing muster in our courts here, that is an awfully strong indictment of the 22 criminal district judges. Yes, some would overrule the motion to suppress but a a low would follow the constitution, you know that pesky document that includes the bill of rights, and suppress the dope.
As for police leaders making officers jump through hoops for illegal aliens, the first big city police chief who told his officers not to inquire about immigration status was Darrel Gates in Los Angeles. We all know how Gates was a well known liberal. His theory was that the local police are in charge of preventing or solving crimes like murder, robbery, rape, burglaries and such like. He took the position that if witnesses are afraid to talk to the police for fear of being deported, they won’t talk and he couldn’t solve crimes.
As for high bonds, prosecutors here routinely seek high bonds on presumptively innocent people charged with violent offenses and no bonds on habitual criminals. Nothing new. It’s been for decades. And misdemeanor judges routinely order interlocks in second offender DWI cases Again, nothing new.
Finally, I probably have been a Texas Republican longer than you’ve been alive. I was an officer in my high school teenage republicans and an officer in the UT Young Republicans while LBJ was in the White House. I’ve been insulted trying to recruit members at a booth on the West Mall at UT. To call me a Rhino pisses me off. I am an unreconstructed Goldwater Republican. I ask, What would Barry do?
Insulting people who don’t agree with you 100 percent of the time is a good way to get people like me to become independents or something else.
As for being a legal mercenary, the Sixth Amendment gives everyone charged with a jailable crime the right to a lawyer. And all lawyers are sworn to represent their clients zealously. That’s what I do for a living, represent the citizen accused of crimes.
If you ever get charged with a crime, don’t come to me for representation unless you want me to give you the representation you want others to get and have me roll over for the prosecution. I’ll be happy to agree to a high bond and forget the presumption of innocence so you are treated like you want others treated.
Tom, few have an issue with having a DA intake, the concern of officers is that the process went from freely accepting good cases to only accepting cases a first year law student could win. Any good process can be corrupted and what police are upset with is how far in the “wrong” direction the pendulum has swung under Ms. Ogg. And you can throw the Constitution up as many times as you like, the courts have established what is acceptable for warrantless searches, the outline of the case provided would likely stand muster in most communities around the country, not just here.
On the topic of illegal immigrants, politically appointed police commanders can say whatever they like but many in the community expect local police to fully cooperate with federal authorities, not hide behind technicalities or find any way possible to defeat enforcement because not only are illegals in violation by being here but they commit many other crimes that would be reduced by getting rid of them. The theory is that getting rid of them means you reduce the number of gangs, the robberies, rapes, and other crimes they commit as opposed to looking the other way so police chiefs can make large salaries and testify how their obstruction is somehow good for the community.
But the complaint regarding bonds and conditions of release has not been around very long, the talk starting shortly after Ms. Ogg assumed office. That is because her ADA’s have not sought higher bonds in most cases, in fact trying to expand free bonds on lower cases and not challenge higher bonds on felony cases when a legal mercenary tries to get them lowered. It is far less likely that they recommend an interlock device under the new leadership too, whether that is a good thing or not depends on your perspective. If they were arguing against the better interests of the community and at least trying, the focus could move to the judges but as they rarely try any more, they are the weak link in the chain. I do not give the police a free pass on any of their complaints but when they show me case after case after case of such easing up on how criminals are treated, it doesn’t take long before they provide ample reason to take them seriously.
So if all it takes is one man’s opinion to convert your allegedly life long commitment to the Republican Party into “something else”, I daresay you are trying to convince people against the evidence of your own words. Not all lawyers are legal mercenaries but I’m not going to mince words when faced with a RINO. If it looks, walks, and acts like one, it probably is one. I’ll even overlook your wild assumptions regarding my age but rather than transpose onto me what officers think of Ms. Ogg, try to view things from their point of view. Her policies, even some of the good ones, are not all favorable to them. Her policies are not all in line with what most upstanding Republican Party followers want too, no surprise given she is a democrat. That doesn’t make her evil but it doesn’t endear her when election time comes around and the GOP field a better candidate to replace her either.
Peter: You’ve convinced me. There is no place in the Republican Party for someone like me because I’m not a REAL Republican because I don’t accept everything you say. I must be a RINO because I believe in what I thought were traditional Republican values like limiting the power of government to infringe on the rights of individuals and belief in the BIll of Rights.
I guess I’m like my hero, Barry Goldwater. In 1964, he was an extremist conservative and by the time he retired from the Senate in 1988, a lot of Republicans thought he was a liberal.
Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways to me.
Tom, you need not agree with me on various issues but there are core issues that form the GOP mindset. From your own words, you sound more like a RINO or liberal so rather than make passive aggressive attacks, just own it with pride. There are limits to government power but that doesn’t mean throwing away all logic and reason as you try to, our Founding Fathers put in place measures to protect us that you apparently find fault with. And you’ll be happy to know your liberal hero, Houston police chief Art Acevedo, has publicly come out swinging against low bonds almost as hard as he’s been fighting to protect illegals from the law of the land and protect drug offenders from state law, so maybe you’ll now see the practice in a different light. But go back to applying for your membership in the ACLU while denouncing reasonable GOP stances, you might as well embrace your true nature.
OK guys, this fight is over. You are both disqualified. Who gives a shit whether you’re a bedrock Republican, a RHINO, a liberal or a warthog.
Tom, I see where you are a Tea Sipper, Peter that makes me wonder if you are an Aggie. You made some good points in your earliest comments, but you’ve degenerated into an unnecessary personal attack on Tom.
Tom, as a former narcotics enforcement officer, I am not overly fond of criminal defense lawyers, but you are spot on when you talk about the rights of citizens. However, you are flat wrong in this case. The exigent circumstances made entry of the garage without a warrant legal.
As for the question, “Is Harris County DA Kim Ogg anti-police?” In my opinion, she is certainly not pro-police.
without a warrant legal….bwahahahahaha
Say no more!
Howie and David, I apologize for following the lead set by “Tom”, though I really didn’t notice his references to UT even if I have no opinion regarding Texas A&M. I picked up on what he was selling and replied accordingly, the bottom line is that none of my hired officers like the changes to the DA’s office since Ms. Ogg took over. Some of her policies have merit to the rest of us but they are unified in thinking her policies are decidedly anti-officer so I took up their charge to at least partially explain their reasoning. That is what is important here, not individual personalities, and anything I may have done to detract from that for whatever reason comes back to me. Best Regards!
Peter, you don’t owe David or me any apology, but you might think about apologizing to Tom.
From what you wrote, I gather you are a police administrator. In supporting the cops who feel Ogg is against them, you remind me of the salesman who made a good pitch for his product, but instead of closing his pitch, he blew the deal by continuing to tout the product.
Here is the deal on Ogg as I see it. As I’ve said, she is an uber-liberal. As such she appointed ADAs that share her liberal philosophy. In any event, the ADAs can’t help but be influenced by her views. In view of her boss’ pot philosophy, I think the ADA in this case was looking for some way to refuse the charges.
I can appreciate that you are supporting how cops feel about Ogg. But let me suggest you stick only to the facts and don’t go beyond that.
Howie, I’m off to join some friends at a game watching party but let me correct you. I’m not a police administrator, I hire some to free lance for me but that is as close as it gets. I don’t always agree with their opinions but since few people are truly considering the question David posed, I chimed in for them based on what they have told me over the last year. I thought I made that clear but most people skim responses so they overlook the details. Given this is an op-ed website, opinions are the backbone of most comments so I’ll chime in as I see fit. My personal take on Ms. Ogg is that she is just about as good as the last DA in her own way but I think the community can do much better. That alone is enough to elicit eye rolling from the officers I hire but I owe Tom nothing, his responses earned the feedback I gave.