Pimping and Pandering
What is Penal Code Section 266(h) Pimping and Penal Code Section 266(i) Pandering?
In California, Pimping and Pandering are classified as two different felony crimes. However, both of these charges are usually lodged against the accused at the same time.
The criminalization against pimping in California is codified in section 266(h) of the Penal Code. California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, prohibits obtaining money or other forms of compensation from the earnings of another through acts act of prostitution. Additionally, California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, also prohibits being compensated for assisting a prostitute in obtaining clients or Johns.
The legal definition of section 266(i) of the California Penal Code Penal - Pandering is the accused's role in encouraging/facilitating another person to either become or remain a prostitute.
D. Martin Jefferson is a lazy unproductive low life useless pseudo-white supremacist lying turd cunt. He is also a rat snitch. One of the lowest life forms ever to crawl out his Momma's rectum. I mean this piece of shit would be hard pressed for Jesus to give him a break. He is that much of a sub-human turd! Like the worst ever. So anyway, D. Martin Jefferson is also a bankrupt loser who does not work but insists he is superior to others as he has white skin covering his cheaply tattooed obese body. He likes to buy Disneyland Grade fireworks from Arizona and bring them back to California where they are illegal, in order to sell them and make cash money that he never reports to the IRS. He easily makes upwards of $15,000.00 a 4th of July holiday season in cash. And remember, he has never reported this cash income to the IRS.
When D. Martin Jefferson was arrested for his possession and sales of these fireworks by Federal Agents, instead of taking his punishment like a man, he decided to fellate several Federal Special Agents from the Department of Homeland Security, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and a certain corpulent Washington D.C. Organized Crimes Task Force “Special" Prosecutor named David who resembles a obese unattractive ex-fluffer for rare John Holmes cross over gay snuff films from 1985, and falsely and intentionally claim that his old acquaintance Attorney Jeff Voll has committed several acts of Racketeering Conspiracy on behalf of a certain Motorcycle Club. He did this because as he testified in the Federal trial, "he was scared of the big bad Washington D.C. prosecutor David." As such, the Federal Government and David, pimped their prostitute D. Martin Jefferson to testify at a Federal Grand Jury hearing falsely against Attorney Jeff Voll so that D. Martin Jefferson would be offered immunity and not be prosecuted for his own Federal crimes of possessing and selling mass quantities of illegal fireworks. So you see, D. Martin Jefferson was the whore and the Federal Government and "Special Prosecutor" David was his Pimp. The fact that John C,, Matt N. and David K. kept D. Martin Jefferson as a paid Federal informant lying whore means they and Uncle Sam are guilty of Pandering.
As we examine the legal definition of these two laws, please keep in mind that one cannot ever be found guilty by a jury unless the prosecutor proves each and every element of the charges beyond all reasonable doubt. An element is simply an essential part of a particular crime. Each of the elements has to be satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt in order for one to be found guilty by a jury. In California, the level of certainty required is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” If even one of the elements cannot be proven, the charges against you will have to be dismissed by the prosecutor or a jury would have to vote not guilty at the conclusion of a jury trial. However, if you have tapioca pudding in your chest and have no heart like that POS rat lying informant scum bag D. Martin Jefferson above then you can simply plea to the charges lodged against you and accept a plea deal or rat your way out of a conviction.
Actual Case #1 represented by Attorney Jeff Voll
In People v. Brandon R. - Case No. BA385663, my client was a music video producer who was not only alleged to have tried to solicit an undercover LAPD officer who was posing as a street walking prostitute to be his whore for the night but that he tried to make her his whore for life. What happened is the Los Angeles Police Department was utilizing scarce resources to not combat murderers, rapists, burglars, welfare cheats or child molesters BUT they were sending out 8-10 man teams on weekend nights in poor minority neighborhoods to catch unsuspecting "Johns" from soliciting street walking whores. My client approached the undercover female LAPD officer and solicited her for work as a model. He told her she could make money and travel with him across the State and Country. After the undercover whore had heard enough she signaled to other cops lying in wait and they arrested him for attempted pimping and pandering. The DA got their hooks in and never let go. They wanted my client to plead to a felony as a pimp. While it's generally understood that Pimpin' ain't easy, my client and I decided to give the District Attorney's Office the finger. We set the case for trial and I brought in one witness on behalf of my client. She was an ex-stripper who was approached by my client years before at a strip club she was working at. He offered her the same things he offered the undercover whore LAPD cop. The witness testified how she subsequently shot many videos with other girls and that my client was always the gentleman and never tried to push up on her. I showed several videos produced by my client where he is not only seen rapping in the videos but dancing as well. Outcome: the jury returned a hung verdict of 9-3 for Not Guilty. The Judge dismissed the case preventing the DA from refiling. No Prison for my Client. Now that's Pimp!
Actual Case #2 represented by Attorney Jeff Voll
In People v. David H. - Case No. BA481648, my client was accused of the very serious sex crimes of (1) human trafficking of a female who was a minor for the purposes of pimping her and (2) two counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor. These charges carried with them a Maximum 18 years of Prison. The Detective had a bone to pick, no pun intended, with my client and when my client was in jail awaiting arraignment, the Detective made a personal visit to my client and through the jail bars in his cell, told my client "I told you I was going to get you." Well my client bailed out of jail and never set foot back in jail/prison and is today a free man. You see, the "victim" in this case WAS a street walking prostitute who walked tracks all over the Country. When law enforcement interviewed her about my client "pimping her" she would refer to my client as her boyfriend and then proceed to talk about the little tiny blue extraterrestrials that were circling right above her inside L. Ron Hubbard's miniature invisible spaceship that was speeding toward earth for a Dianetics reunion at their Celebrity Center in Hollywood. Outcome: The case was dismissed after about 6 months of me putting up a fight.
As we examine the legal definition of these two laws, please keep in mind that one cannot ever be found guilty by a jury unless the prosecutor proves each and every element of the charges beyond all reasonable doubt. An element is simply an essential part of a particular crime. Each of the elements has to be satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt in order for one to be found guilty by a jury. In California, the level of certainty required is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” If even one of the elements cannot be proven, the charges against you will have to be dismissed by the prosecutor or a jury would have to vote not guilty at the conclusion of a jury trial. However, if you have tapioca pudding in your chest and have no heart like that POS scum bag D. Martin Jefferson above then you can simply plea to the charges lodged against you and accept a plea deal or rat your way out of a conviction.
What is the legal definition of California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping?
The elements of section 266(h) of the Penal Code - Pimping:
(1) You were aware that the person you were working with was a prostitute;
(2) You were supported by the compensation earned by the prostitute, OR the money that was given in advance to a person who runs a whore house supported you OR, you asked for or obtained money for finding clients or Johns for the prostitute.
You cannot be found guilty of violating section 266(h) of the Penal Code - Pimping, if you did not know that the person you were “employing” was a whore. So, if you did not know that the person you were dealing with was a street walking whore, you cannot be found guilty of violating California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping. Additionally, if you simply had a gut feeling, but were not completely sure, that the person you were employing with was a cheap prostitute, you cannot be found guilty of violating California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping. It doesn't matter that a reasonable person would have known or should have known that the employee was a whore. Actual knowledge is required to meet this element of California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping.
Prostitute (men, women, non-binary, pre-op transsexual, post-op transsexual, gay, lesbian, queer, questioning, etc ..)
California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, defines a prostitute as a person (human) who engages in sexual intercourse or a lewd and lascivious act with another for money or other types of payment. A lewd or lascivious act is one in which the private parts (prostitute or client or another) are physically touched in order to be sexually stimulated or satisfied.
The accused need not actively participate in the procurement of “John's” for the prostitute to be charged and convicted for the act of Pimping to aid prostitution. You can be charged and found guilty of Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, even if you were only financially compensated from the act of prostitution. But remember, it is important to note that you can be convicted of violating section 266(h) of the Penal Code - Pimping, if you were aware that the person who compensated you was a whore.
Compensation for Finding Clients/John's
This section of California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, is what most people would generally consider “pimping.” You are liable under Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, if you sought or obtained compensation for finding clients for a prostitute. Think Heidi Fleiss. This section of the law applies to not only “street pimps” on the block. Think Huggy Bear. But this applies to all folks who get paid for finding John's for ho's no matter how blue collar or white collar the trade is. You can have Big Daddy Mack on the Century corridor in Inglewood running nasty ass crack whore's for $20.00 per round-the-world trick or you can have Madame Highbrow arranging ass for Magic Johnson and his insatiable appetite for “rainbows” [red head, blonde and brunette] after a game at $1000's per color. This is also the part of Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, that prosecutors apply to brothel owners or even K-Town massage parlor owners.
What is the Legal definition of section 266(i) of the California Penal Code Penal - Pandering
Keep in mind that the prosecution must always prove all the elements of a sexual crime beyond a reasonable doubt before you can be convicted at trial by a jury. The elements of section 266(i) of the California Penal Code - Pandering are as follows:
You committed one or more of the following acts/elements:
(1) Convinced or sought another person to become a prostitute by;
(2) Promising, threatening, conspiring, persuading, encouraged or induced another person to become a prostitute;
(3) Arranged for another to become a prostitute in a whore house (or any other place where prostitution is permitted)
(4) Promised, threatened, conspired, persuaded, encouraged or induced another person to continue being a whore;
(5) Defrauded/deceived, threatened/abused a position of authority/trust in order to convince or get another person to become a prostitute, OR to go whore at a place where prostitution is permitted, OR to enter or leaving California with the intent to commit prostitution [Federal Offense]
(6) Received/granted, or made a contract/agreement to obtain any type of compensation in exchange for persuading/obtaining another person to become a prostitute OR to cross State lines with the intent to commit prostitution
(7) With the intention of convincing that person to become/remain a prostitute.
Caveat: One cannot be charged criminally for violating California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering, if you attempted to convince another person to have sex with you in exchange for money. Section 266(i) of the California Penal Code, Pandering, only applies to the act of recruiting/persuading/convincing another person to commit an act of prostitution with someone else. It is not uncommon for strip club owners to be charged with violating California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering as they often try to make money soliciting drunken John's to bang the staff.
What are the sanctions for violating Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, and California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering?
Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, and California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering, are classified as felonies in California. Potential penalties include the following: up to 3 to 6 years in a California state prison, a maximum fine of $10,000, and/or formal probation.
The Judge has discretion to add an additional fine of $5,000. The Judge makes her or his decision based on the specific facts of the allegations, how much money was gained from the pimping or pandering, and how much the victim suffered.
Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, and California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering with a Minor
The penalties for Pimping or Pandering with a minor are much more serious. If the minor is under the age of eighteen, you will have to register as a sex offender for life and under California sex offender registration laws, you have to register every year and whenever you relocate your residence.
If your California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, or California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering, involves a minor under 16, the additional penalty is up to 8 years in State Prison.
California Penal Code Section 266(h) Pimping and California Penal Code Section 266(i) Pandering differ from other sex crimes in that you are subject to higher penalties even if you honestly believed the person Pimped or Pandered was over the age of 18 years. It does not matter whether you thought you were Pimping or Pandering an adult. You are subject to increased penalties regardless of the age you thought the Pimped or Pandered person was. This not like other sex crimes where one can avoid a charge or conviction if it was believed the Pimped or Pandered was an adult, even if they were in fact a minor.
California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering with a Minor and Human Trafficking Laws
California passed Proposition 35 in July of 2012, making convictions of California Penal Code Section 266(i) involving a minor subject to the California's human trafficking laws. Therefore, if you intended and caused/induced or convinced someone under the age of 18 to commit prostitution you could also be found guilty of human trafficking. The penalties for human trafficking are much more severe than those for Pandering.
California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping, and California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering as they relate to Immigration Issues:
Federal Immigration authorities consider California Penal Code Section 266(h) Pimping and California Penal Code Section 266(i) Pandering to be “crimes of moral turpitude.” If you are not a USA citizen, a conviction under one of these two sections could have serious immigration consequences. This is true even if legally reside in the United States. A conviction under one of these two sections could cause you to be deported and not subject to re-entry, prohibit you from entering the United States after departure, prevent you from becoming a U.S.A. citizen or obtaining legal residency here. Deportation occurs only if the particular crime has aggravated circumstances or if one has multiple prior convictions of moral turpitude.
What are some legal defenses against California Penal Code Section 266(h) - Pimping or California Penal Code Section 266(I) - Pandering?
This defense is available if the defendant's attorney can prove two separate facts. First, attorney has to prove that law enforcement officers acted in a coercive manner AND Secondly, the lawyer has to prove that his client acted unlawfully due to the far reaching methods of the police. Typically, the defense of police entrapment is available when a defendant is arrested as a result of an undercover police operation. The most common undercover police operation in cases involving Child Pornography involve online chat rooms.
It is not uncommon for defendants to face false allegations under California Penal Code Section 311 - Child Pornography. There have been many cases where work associates, in order to get someone they do not get along with fired or family members involved in divorce proceedings have surreptitiously placed illegal material on the defendant's phone. This is especially true with ex-spouses trying to gain an advantage in future divorce or custody hearings. In these types of cases, your sex crimes attorney Jeff Voll may be able to get the charges dismissed if he can prove that other people had access to the computer or phone in question.
BELOW ARE SOME CASES I HANDLED WHERE FALSE ALLEGATIONS RESULTED IN THE ARREST OF THE INNOCENT
Actual Case #1 represented by Attorney Jeff Voll
In People v. F. H. - Case No. 1CJ03293-01, my client was charged with 4 counts of sexual molestation of a minor and 4 counts of lewd conduct of a minor. The alleged victims were his kids! This case was filed as a misdemeanor because the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office saw the B.S. on the wall in bright neon paint that these were false allegations so they referred it to the Los Angeles City Attorney's Office who only filed misdemeanors. It was clear from the police report that the ex-wife mother of the kids was a life time subscriber to the old adage "hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn." You see, because they were divorcing, Mom wanted sole custody of the kids, so the Mom made her kids lie about my client touching them because Mom is a POS who forced her kids to lie so my client would not get custody. I mean this turd actually made her minor son and daughter lie to the police while forcing them to talk about their private parts and so forth. Yes, this happens. And it happens often. This is not the first time someone has fabricated a tale and used the criminal justice system against an innocent party. Just take me Attorney Jeff Voll as the defendant and perjuring losers John, David and Matt etc... for example. Anyway, the allegations she made were completely untrue. It was clear that she was full of excrement. Nevertheless, the City Attorney prosecutor (who has quite a reputation on the World Wide Web) filed 4 counts of sexual molestation of a minor and 4 counts of lewd conduct of a minor against my client which would mean if he was convicted he would have to register as a sex offender for life. After my Private Investigator got a chance to interview the kids, the prosecutor threw in towel. This case was clearly such bullshit that I could not wait for jury trial. Outcome: Case Dismissed.
Actual Case #2 represented by Attorney Jeff Voll
In People v. J. A. - Case No. FVI21002809, my client was charged with 3 sex crimes counts: 1 count of continuous sexual abuse of a minor under 14 years of age, 1 count of lewd conduct of a minor under 14 and 1 count of lewd conduct with a 14 year old. The alleged victims were my client's great grandchildren! This case was filed as a Life in Prison felony by the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office due to their being multiple "victims" and took over 2 years to fight. The trial lasted 3 weeks. It was crystal clear from the police report and associated discovery that the "victim" grandchildren were lying through their teeth and wanted to cast blame on Great Grand Dad because the youngest of the two "victims" at age 8 would like to take selfies of her vagina using great grand dad's tablet phone and the oldest of the two "victims at age 16 would travel to Bakersfield 3 times overnight to get down with an adult male. So when Chile Protective Services came around to investigate these incidents, the two little skeezers for the first time, after "years of abuse," told their parents and CPS that Great Grand Dad touched them and fingered their vaginas. Both "victims" testified at trial and were caught lying on the witness stand. The oldest of the two continue to make up lies ON THE WITNESS STAND which the jury could clearly see was a fairytale. Yes, this happens. And it happens often. This is not the first time someone has fabricated a story and used the criminal justice system against an innocent party. Just take me as the defendant and turds John, David, Matt, Gary, Jefferson, Angel, Scott and Midget etc... for example. Anyway, the allegations the children made were completely untrue. It was clear that the kids were completely full of excrement. Remember, if my client was convicted he would have had to register as a sex offender for life IF he ever made it out of a Life in Prison sentence. Outcome: Jury Verdict All Counts Not Guilty!
How I Can Help - Call me at 323-467-6400
If you have been accused of committing Pimping, Pandering or Human Trafficking or other sex crimes like lewd conduct, indecent exposure, prostitution, sexual assault, and sexual battery in the Los Angeles area, I have the resources and track record to defend you. Jeff Voll is skilled at defending these types of cases and knows how to defeat sex crimes allegations by the prosecution. Legal niche experts, researchers, investigators, and more also boost the effectiveness of our defense team. Contact us today at 323-467-6400, and we will put our knowledge and experience to work for you.
Remember that Attorney Jeff Voll is the ONLY California criminal defense firm that can truthfully state he achieved over 100 case dismissals in one 12 month period. Look no further for an attorney to represent you or a loved one.