Law Offices of David D. Diamond

01/08/2026

For years, Border Patrol agents have engaged in reckless, abusive, unconstitutional conduct in their limited zone of authority and have rarely faced accountability for abuses. In the last 15 years, nearly 200 people have died as a result of encounters with Border Patrol: that includes 70 use-of-force cases, six people killed in cross-border shootings with no impunity, and more than 100 fatalities from Border Patrol-led car chases. Upon taking office, the Trump administration rescinded a hard-won agency policy to restrict these dangerous car chases.
Among those shot and killed by an on-duty agent was 16-year-old Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez. In 2012, Jose was shot approximately 10 times through the border fence by a U.S. Border Patrol agent while walking home from playing basketball. He was shot in the back and died on the sidewalk, only a few blocks from his home. In 2023, Border Patrol agents shot Raymond Mattia nine times, killing him outside his home on tribal lands in Arizona.
No agent has ever been convicted of criminal wrongdoing while on duty, despite documented deaths, excessive use of force during arrests, inadequate medical care, and deaths in Border Patrol custody due to neglect. The agency has a longstanding crisis of accountability. A decade ago, CBP’s former internal affairs chief warned that the agency “goes out of its way to evade legal restraints” and is “clearly engineered to interfere with our efforts to hold the Border Patrol accountable.”

01/08/2026

So pleased to serve the community by coaching a high school and middle school mock trial team.

The Mock Trial team focuses on learning about the courtroom, the law and the rules of evidence.  We enhance your public speaking skills and create confidence as you walk into any room, not just a courthouse. 

01/08/2026

celebrating 25 years of trials and litigation.

Are you or a loved one in need of aggressive criminal defense in Los Angeles? With a proven track record, Diamond & Associates can help. Call today!

01/08/2026

Very pleased that we prevailed in getting a restraining order for a petitioner in a very religious setting, where the husband had systematically abused her for years. Now she and the kids are safe!!! The trial was before the Supervising Judge of the Family Law Division of Los Angeles county.

01/08/2026

Great result in Chatsworth court. Successfully defending a frivolous restraining order for a great father who was falsely being accused of wrongdoing.

07/25/2025

Great day in family law court.
Our client, a victim of domestic violence, was granted a renewal of her restraining order.

07/24/2025

Another restraining order victory for a victim who was abused by her ex boyfriend. 5 year permanent order issued.

Were you served with a restraining order? A Los Angeles criminal lawyer from Diamond & Associates can offer an effective defense against the charges.

07/24/2025

Client facing third strike, 25 to life.
(Priors were 1990 and 1999). Our trial team was able to work a deal that struck both priors and the offer was 2 years. LASC-San Fernando Court

Are you or a loved one in need of aggressive criminal defense in Los Angeles? With a proven track record, Diamond & Associates can help. Call today!

07/24/2025

How can you get a restraining order renewed?

The ability to renew a DVRO without a showing of further abuse is one part of a comprehensive statutory response to domestic violence, which the Legislature has identified as “the number one health risk among women.” (Assem. Com. on Judiciary, Analysis of Assem. Bill No. 935 (1995–1996 Reg. Sess.) as introduced Feb. 22, 1995, p. 1.) The scheme is “broad” in its intent, and each section must therefore be broadly construed to accomplish its purpose. (N.T. v. H.T. (2019) 34 Cal.App.5th 595, 602 [246 Cal. Rptr. 3d 362].)

Ritchie delineated three factors (the “Ritchie factors”) to help courts answer that question. First, courts must consider the factual predicate for the original DVRO—the evidence and any findings on which it was based. (Ritchie, supra, 115 Cal.App.4th at p. 1290.) The mere existence of the order itself “seldom if [*422] ever” conclusively proves that it should be extended. (Id. at p. 1291.) However, the findings and facts which supported making the order “often will be enough in themselves” to justify renewing it later. (Ibid.)
HN5 Second, courts must consider any significant change in circumstances that occurred after the DVRO was issued. (Ritchie, supra, 115 Cal.App.4th at p. 1291.) If the protected and restrained parties have “moved on with their lives,” in a way that lessens the opportunity for or likelihood of future abuse, the need for the order may have dissipated. (Ibid.) On the other hand, if little has changed or there is now an increased possibility of abuse, the need for the order continues. (Ibid.)
While this factor clearly invites courts to consider how the restrained person has behaved since the DVRO was [***11] issued, courts must do more than simply ask whether the restrained person has violated the terms of the order. An order that has never been violated may still be renewed. (Ritchie, supra, 115 Cal.App.4th at p. 1284 [“section 6345 makes it unnecessary for the protected party to introduce or the court to consider actual acts of abuse the restrained party committed after the original order went into effect”].)
HN6 Third and finally, there is the issue of whether, and how much, the DVRO burdens the restrained party. (Ritchie, supra, 115 Cal.App.4th at p. 1291.) This factor “may or may not” be relevant, depending on whether there is a risk of physical abuse. (Ibid.) On one hand, “the physical security of the protected party trumps all … burdens.” (Id. at p. 1292.) On the other, if the danger presented is “a few unwanted calls or letters or e-mail messages,” the court may weigh that danger against any burdens imposed by renewal. (Ibid.)

07/20/2025

Litigant still fired even after winning DVRO case

A family law court’s decision denying a request by a woman for an order to her boyfriend to stay away from her did not have a preclusive effect, so as to bar the state from firing the man from his post as a youth correctional officer, Div. Six of the Court of Appeal for this district held yesterday...

07/12/2025

Full service trial litigation firm protecting the constitution every day.

03/28/2025

Our firm has become the preeminent experts on restraining orders. Please reach out for help with domestic violence or civil harassment cases. 213 250 9100.