People v. JA - Felony Possession of a Controlled Substance
Our Client was charged with Felony Possession of a Controlled Substance. The Police pulled over a vehicle that our Client was driving. Our Client's driver's license was expired and he was arrested for that. A search of our Client pursuant to his arrest revealed a hand-rolled tinfoil paper package of heroin. All charges were dismissed at the Preliminary Hearing.
People v. AG
TheClient was charged with Felony Manufacturing and Delivery of a Controlled Substance. The Police alleged that they saw our Client talking to someone in a double parked car. According to the police, this meant she was engaged in a drug transaction. They claim they saw her adjusting the waistband of her pants. They felt they had enough to stop and search her. They allegedly recovered narcotics from her waistband. What they forgot to mention in any of the reports is that our Client was VERY pregnant at the time. (which explains why she would be adjusting the waistband of her pants). We filed a Motion to Quash Arrest and Suppress Evidence claiming that the Police violated our Client's rights when they searched her simply for talking to someone in a vehicle and adjusting her pants. The Judge agreed, and the case was dismissed.
People v. EB
Police were responding to a call of shots fired with a description of 2 people running from the scene. Our Client was seen running from the scene with another individual. At trial, the Officer testified that he saw the other individual give the gun to our Client. Our Client then allegedly tried to hide under a car and push the gun away. We successfully argued that our Client had no choice other than to briefly possess the gun when the other individual threw it our Client and did what anyone would do and tried to immediately get rid of it. The Judge agreed stating that our Client had 2 choices: 1.) Get rid of the gun or 2.) Keep the gun, and risk getting shot by the police officers who were arriving. Our Client made the right choice, didn't get shot and was found not guilty!
People v. VL
Client was charged with Felony Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon. The case was dismissed after litigating a Motion to Quash Arrest and Suppress Evidence. The Judge found that the police who were responding to a call of shots fired had no information connecting Client to the shots fired and, therefore, had no reason to search him and recover a weapon.
People v. MW
Our Client was charged with Felony Unlawful use of a Weapon by a Convicted Felon. He was facing a mandatory prison sentence of 3-7 years if convicted. Police were called to the scene of a drunk armed security guard at a local store. When they arrived, our Client was working armed security at the location. After speaking with our Client, it was determined that he did not have the credentials he needed to work armed security on his person and he was arrested. At the station, a background check showed that our Client had a prior felony DUI conviction. However, our investigation showed that our Client applied for an FOID card, and one was issued after a background check by the Illinois State Police. Our client successfully went thru a federal background check when purchasing his weapon. Our Client took the required classes and applied for his credentials to work armed security. Again the Illinois State Police issued the credentials. The prosecution took the position that the only reason our Client was able to obtain the proper credentials was because he lied on the paperwork by not disclosing his prior felony conviction. They initially offered the maximum of 7 years in prison. Our position from the beginning was that our Client did not understand that when he received probation for the Felony DUI, it was a felony conviction. Our Client incorrectly believed that probation was not a felony conviction. Our Client incorrectly believed that only people who were sentenced to prison were convicted felons and anyways, his conviction was only for a traffic DUI...how could he possibly be a convicted felon. We were successfully able to negotiate a recommended sentence of 2 years in prison on a reduced charge. However, our Client rejected that offer and we set the case for Jury Trial. The day of the trial the prosecution made an offer of probation to resolve the matter, and it was an offer that our Client couldn't refuse. We successfully avoided prison for our Client.
People v. NB - Felony Theft
Our Client was the target of a long term investigation of thefts from Target. Our Client was alleged to have participated in a scheme to purchase hard drives and remove the drives from their casings, replacing them with crayons or garbage and then returning the hard drives for their full retail value. Many of the incidents were caught on video. The amount of loss suffered by Target was over $5,000. We were able to successfully negotiate expungeable probation for our Client and avoid a felony conviction.
People v. MB
Our Client was charged with Felony Unlawful Use of a Weapon by a Convicted Felon. He had 5 prior Felony Convictions. The Police served a search warrant on our Client's house. Our Client was the target of the Search Warrant. When the Police searched the house, they recovered a firearm under a bed. The police claimed that they knew the bedroom where the gun was recovered from belonged to our Client because they found some mail bearing our Client's name and a Social Security Card belonging to our Client in the same bedroom. Therefore, according to the Police, the gun must've belonged to our Client. Although, there were multiple other individuals present, our Client was not present at the time the Police were searching the house and was only arrested weeks later. The Prosecutors offered the maximum sentence of 7 years in prison to settle the case. Naturally, we rejected that offer and took our Client's case to trial. The verdict was Not Guilty.
People v. AR - Felony Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle
Our Client was charged with Felony Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle. He was facing up to 7 years in prison. The Police received a phone call from the victim stating that he had located his stolen motor vehicle. When officers arrived, they stopped the car (Range Rover), and discovered that our Client was the driver. At first our Client said that the car belonged to his uncle but he couldn't remember his uncle's name. Later he admitted to "finding" the vehicle. We were able to convince the prosecution to offer our Client Deferred Prosecution which is a special program that, if successfully completed, will result in a completed dismissal of all the felony charges.
People v. MM
Client was charged with Class X - Armed Habitual Criminal. The Police claimed to be doing a Parole Compliance Check on our Client. They entered his residence and claimed that a duffel bag in the living room contained a loaded gun. The Police alleged that they knew the gun belonged to our Client because they also claim to have found his ID in the same duffel bag. The prosecutors also brought up our Client's previous felony convictions. The case was dismissed at the Preliminary Hearing!
People v. SB
Client was charged with Felony Possession of a Controlled Substance. The case was dismissed at the Preliminary Hearing Stages.
Page 23 of 34