People v. KW
Our Client was charged with Felony Possession of a Controlled Substance. The Police pulled our Client over for a minor traffic violation. A subsequent search of the car revealed narcotics. All charges were dismissed at the Preliminary Hearing.
People v. RM
Our Client was charged with Felony Retail Theft and was facing 1 - 3 years in prison. Because our Client's family contacted us immediately after his arrest, we were able to appear in bond court and obtain house arrest for him instead of him sitting in the County. At the Preliminary Hearing we were able to convince the prosecution to reduce the charges to a misdemeanor and give our Client Time Considered Served for the 7 days he spend on house arrest. He couldn't believe it!
People v. DG
Our Client was charged with DUI. Police responded to calls of a man sleeping behind the wheel of a stopped vehicle that was stopped and facing the wrong way (against the flow of traffic). Our Client was allegedly found in the driver's seat, not wearing his seat belt with open alcohol in the center console. Police observed that our Client had bloodshot, watery and glassy eyes and that our Client was very sleepy. Our Client was allegedly confused, mumbling his words and smelled strongly of alcohol. Our Client refused a breath test and was allegedly too sleepy to perform field sobriety tests. We were able to negotiate a plea for supervision and successfully avoid a conviction for our Client.
People v. DG
Client was charged with Felony Possession of a Controlled Substance. The case was dismissed during the Preliminary Hearing Stages.
People v. CF - Violation of Order of Protection
Our Client was charged with Violation of an Order of Protection. Our Client had been served with an Order of Protection in open court. The prosecution alleged that he violated the order of protection by sending a multitude of text messages to the victim on several messaging platforms to the victim. The victim was able to provide proof of the messages by turning over her phone to the prosecution. In the end, the case was completely dismissed!
People v. GM
Our Client was charged with Felony Driving on a Revoked or a Suspended License. The police claimed that they stopped our Client because he parked his car in an ally in such a way that he was blocking the flow of traffic. When they asked for his license, he was only able to produce an ID card. When the police ran his name, they learned that his license was revoked. All charges were dismissed at the Preliminary Hearing.
People v. EC
Our Client was charged with Felony Possession of Cannabis. A State Trooper pulled a car over for an obstructed license plate and crack in the windshield. Our Client was a passenger in that car. The Trooper claims to have immediately smelled cannabis coming from the vehicle when he approached for a field interview. Our Client allegedly admitted to having almost $1,000 of weed in the car. Although the case went beyond the Preliminary Hearing, we were able to negotiate a deal with the prosecution for special expungeable probation. If our Client successfully completes the probation, he will be able to get this arrest and avoid a felony conviction.
People v. LC
Our Client was charged with 2 connected Felony cases. One case of Felony Forgery for allegedly possessing counterfeit money and one case of Felony Theft for using counterfeit money to buy a car. Our Client was facing up to 5 years in prison for these cases. Although the cases went beyond the Preliminary Hearing Stages, we were able to negotiate a successful outcome. The prosecution agreed to a sentence of "Second Chance Probation," if our Client agreed to pay the Victim of the Theft case "real" money to replace the counterfeit money. If our Client pays the restitution and successfully completes the probation, these cases will be dismissed, will not result in felony convictions and will be immediately eligible for expungement after dismissal.
People v. FP
Client was charged with Possession of 2000 - 5000 Grams of Cannabis with Intent to Deliver. The Police intercepted an overnight delivery package addressed to our Client at UPS. The package contained 10 lbs of Cannabis. The Police formed a plan to engage in an undercover operation to deliver the package. Officers planted an electronic monitoring device inside the package. Then an Undercover Officer posing as a UPS worker attempted to deliver the package to our Client. When no one answered the door the package was left on the porch. Eventually, our Client came out and retrieved the package. The device inside the package alerted the Officers that the package was opened and they forced entry into our Client's house. Allegedly, the Cannabis had been removed and our Client was in the middle of a drug deal with another individual. The Police claimed that our Client confessed to trying to deliver the Cannabis. The main problem with the prosecution's case was that even though the Police went through all the trouble of intercepting the package, having a narcotics dog check it for drugs, obtaining one warrant to open it, fixing it with an electronic monitoring device, obtaining another search warrant for our Client's house, creating an undercover operation and executing that operation - all within the span of a couple of hours - the Police never video recorded the sting operation! The Police never recorded our Client's alleged confession. They didn't even bother to write it out in crayon and have our Client sign it. We took our case to Jury Trial, and when asked why there wasn't any video surveillance footage, the officer claimed that his unit was not provided with the necessary equipment to record the operation. When pressed about why, in this day and age of cell phones, was this incident not recorded in some way? The Officer claimed he didn't know how to use his cell phone and didn't know if any of the other officers knew how to use their phones. The Jury clearly saw through this gaping hole in the case and the verdict was NOT GUILTY!!!
People v. DE
Client was charged with Unlawful Use of a Weapon - Convicted Felon. Although the case went beyond the Preliminary Hearing Stages we were successful in the end. We filed a Motion to Quash Arrest and Suppress Evidence. The Officer testified that he saw our Client drinking on the public way. This allegation is why the Officer initially approached an arrested our Client. Allegedly our Client then admitted to having a gun in his pocket. The problem is that our Client was on "private property." As a result, even if he was drinking, he wasn't breaking any laws. Therefore, there was no reason for the Officer to even approach him, much less arrest and search him. Our motion was granted and the case was dismissed.
Page 27 of 34