According to sources, 26 year-old Bynes started off the evening having a pleasant dinner at the Standard Hotel. Although she was observed drinking, the source did not believe that she was intoxicated. She then moved to the Greystone Manor nightclub, where she stayed until after midnight.

Although Bynes has only been charged with a misdemeanor, it appears people in Bynes' camp are taking the charges seriously. A source told People magazine that Bynes' DUI arrest reflected a "serious lapse in judgment," on the part of the actress.

Bynes' father, Rick, was more defiant and came to his daughter's defense, telling reporters that Bynes wasn't intoxicated but was simply "upset and very emotional." He also claimed that his daughter doesn't drink.

Many believe Bynes' arrest may have grown from her professional troubles. The actress has struggled since 2008 and some believe she may have lost her way.

The fresh-faced actress may be on her way sooner rather than later. Not only does the arrest mark her first DUI offense, but there are no published accounts disclosing the actress' blood alcohol content (BAC). The results of her BAC could prove critical in her defense.

Source: www.people.com, "Amanda Bynes 'Has Been a Little Lost' in Recent Years: Source," Dahvi Shira, 10 April 2012

Federal authorities reported seizing over $4 million worth of counterfeit goods in Los Angeles as part of a six-week sting operation titled, "Operation Holiday Hoax." The worldwide operation was part of a collaborative effort between Homeland Security Investigations, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Consumer Products Safety Commission.

The goods that were taken were mainly apparel items with name brands such as North Face, True Religion and Nike. Globally the value of the goods seized during the operation was estimated at over $76 million.

Counterfeiting is common during the holiday season, but it is not confined to just goods alone. Law enforcement also sees an increase in counterfeit money during this time of year. Anyone suspected of counterfeiting in Los Angeles will face federal fraud charges.

The flurry of activity during the holidays makes it attractive to counterfeiters. Store clerks overwhelmed by the deluge of shoppers are less likely to catch counterfeiters. Tourist destinations, like Los Angeles, which have a large number of people passing through the city daily make it an attractive location for would be counterfeiters.

The U.S. Secret Service advises shoppers to be on the lookout as well. Frazzled store clerks are just as likely to pass counterfeit money back to them. U.S. currency should be sharp with bold crisp lines that make the images stand out on the paper. Even the paper itself is distinctive. It is made with blue and red fibers woven into it.

Counterfeiting is not always done by a skilled operation with sophisticated printing presses in other countries. Sometimes counterfeit bills are created on a home printer.

Anyone suspected of manufacturing false currency, selling counterfeit goods or passing counterfeit money, could be charged with a federal fraud crime. These kinds of charges bring consequences. A person convicted of counterfeiting may be subject to substantial fines as well as prison time.

Source: www.sfgate.com, "Feds: More Than $4M Counterfeit Goods Seized in LA," 22 December 2011, Associated Press

This month, Governor Jerry Brown balked at the opportunity to pass a bill that would shield Californians from invasive searches of cellphones. Citing a reluctance to overrule the decision made by the California Supreme Court in January - that determined a warrant was not necessary before searching a cellphone collected during an individual's arrest - the governor left the door open to police invasion into the private lives of Californians.

The Supreme Court case, People v. Diaz, drew an outrage from civil rights advocates and criminal defense attorneys who argued that smartphones, unlike other pieces of personal property such as cigarette packages and clothing, can hold vast amounts of information. The court reasoned that the cellphone's immediate association with the defendant made the police search of the cellphone valid.

Lawmakers agreed with privacy advocates and introduced legislation that would require a warrant before searching a cellphone seized during an arrest. The bill swept through the legislature with unanimous approval before being stomped on by the governor.

The governor gave a weak statement to CNN justifying his decision, "The courts are better suited to resolve complex and case-specific issues relating to constitutional search-and-seizure protections." The governor's response relays a fundamental misunderstanding of the origins of legal protections.

Courts have always existed to uphold the law, but they do not create it. While individual states are not at liberty to strip federal constitutional protections, they may enact legislation to provide greater protections to its people. Where there is ambiguity in the law, courts interpret it as it is written.

Legislators were simply trying to provide the teeth necessary to protect Californians from broad and sweeping searches into their personal lives. The veto permits police to search all of the information contained within a cellphone, including search history, chat logs, all application data, address books and call logs.

The United States Supreme Court rejected a petition to hear the Diaz case on October 3^rd. California legislators must wait a year before introducing the legislation for a second time.

Source: www.cnn.com, "California Governor Allows Warrantless Searches of Cellphones," 11 October 2011, Amy Gahran