For years, Flock Safety’s automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras have quietly become one of the most powerful — and most controversial — tools in California law enforcement. That controversy reached a tipping point this month when the Los Angeles Police Department, the third-largest police force in the country, walked away from its contract with the company. For anyone facing a DUI, theft, or other criminal charge built on ALPR “hits,” this development matters, and it’s exactly the kind of evidentiary weak point our firm looks for when building a defense.

Why LAPD Walked Away

On July 11, 2026, LAPD allowed its three-year agreement with Flock Safety to lapse rather than renew it. LAPD’s chief information officer, Dean Gialamas, was blunt about the reason: the department had “serious concerns around civil liberties and civil rights issues, particularly around privacy and the data that is being collected from these cameras.” According to ABC7 Los Angeles, the cameras — which are typically owned not by police but by private organizations and homeowners’ associations that grant police access — will remain in place, but LAPD says it wants new contract language addressing privacy and data storage before it resumes full use (ABC7 Los Angeles).

The California Supreme Court’s recent decision in In re Kowalczyk is one of the most significant developments in California criminal law and pretrial release procedures in years. Building upon the Court’s earlier ruling in In re Humphrey, the new decision further limits the ability of courts to rely upon unaffordable money bail as a means of keeping defendants in custody while their cases are pending.

For anyone arrested in California, including those facing DUI charges, drug crimes, theft offenses, domestic violence allegations, or other criminal charges, the Kowalczyk decision may have a substantial impact on whether they remain in jail or are released while awaiting trial.

Understanding Bail in California

When prosecutors cannot make their case through live, in-court testimony, they often turn to hearsay — especially alleged victim statements made to police, medical providers, or third parties. In California criminal cases, understanding how these statements come in — and how to keep them out — can determine the outcome of a trial.

At the Law Offices of William M. Weinberg, hearsay litigation is not treated as an afterthought. It is often the central battleground.

Below is a practical overview of how California law handles victim hearsay — and where the real defense opportunities lie.

When prosecutors cannot make their case through live, in-court testimony, they often turn to hearsay — especially alleged victim statements made to police, medical providers, or third parties. In California criminal cases, understanding how these statements come in — and how to keep them out — can determine the outcome of a trial.

At the Law Offices of William M. Weinberg, hearsay litigation is not treated as an afterthought. It is often the central battleground.

Below is a practical overview of how California law handles victim hearsay — and where the real defense opportunities lie.

Over the past couple of years, e-bikes have exploded in popularity across California, especially in Orange County, where sunny weather and beach paths make them an easy choice for getting around. But with that popularity has come something else: a wave of new rules, penalties, and even criminal cases aimed at riders, including both adults and minors. Cities and state lawmakers are scrambling to keep up, and that means regular riders sometimes find themselves facing unexpected fines, bike impounds, or even misdemeanor or felony charges.

What’s Behind the Crackdown?

Cities and counties are seeing more collisions, dangerous riding near schools, and young riders on high-powered or modified e-bikes. As a result, local governments have moved quickly, often faster than the state, to create new regulations. These include helmet requirements for minors, restrictions on riding in certain areas, impoundment authority, and stricter enforcement of speed and modification limits.