My client was charged with marijuana possession. However, because the officer did not mention the smell or odor of anything prior to conducting a search, I filed a motion to suppress for lack of probable cause. In most possession cases, probable cause stems from odor or smell of the drug, however this case was different and without probable cause it was dismissed.
A client of mine was charged with shoplifting. At the first court appearance, the witness, who was also the complainant, was not given a notice to appear and I insisted that he show up. At the second appearance, the complainant’s colleague appeared but not him. The colleague couldn’t testify as she was not the one who witnessed my client allegedly steal. The court date was rescheduled again.
At this time, I asked the Judge to either enter a trial or dismiss order at the next court date. In other words, if the case did not proceed to trial then the matter would be dismissed. On the third court date the complainant who actually witnessed the theft did not show up and the case was dismissed. My client was satisfied with the outcome, as there was a real possibility of a minimum of 90 days in jail as a mandatory sentence.
DUI and Refusal Dismissed
A 70 year old client rolled his vehicle over three times. Even though he did terribly on the field sobriety tests I was able to get them discounted due to the severe accident and the client’s age. Luckily, the client refused to go to the hospital, even though the police urged him to go. A blood test at the hospital could have proven detrimental to our case, however, my client more concerned about the hospital billing him for the stay and never went. At the station, officers were unable to get a good reading for a breath sample, as my client couldn’t submit enough breath due to his emphysema. Without a sample to test for blood alcohol concentration, the refusal was dismissed as well.
Marijuana Possession Dismissed
Client’s marijuana possession charge was dismissed because the judge signed a holup order to produce the test results. Also, the state was unable to produce discovery within 30 days. Hence, the charges were dropped.
DUI Downgraded to First Tier
The client had a .18 reading, where exposure was 7 months, resulting in loss license with 6 months interlock device installation. The case was thrown out because police failed to follow twenty-minute observation protocol. Instead, the client lost their license for three months without the interlock. This was based on observations, due to fact that there was an odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and inability to stand or walk straight.
Refusal Thrown Out
The client had a refusal thrown out where exposure was 7 months with a loss of license and six months interlock device installation. The refusal was thrown out because police read the implied consent paragraph 36 to the client, advising him that he has no right to refuse the Alcotest. When he tried to submit a breath sample he could not correctly, because the police did not demonstrate and explain to him in his native language how to blow into the machine.
Possession of Marijuana Case
Client charged with Marijuana possession. However, the officer did not mention smell or odor of anything prior to conducting a search so I filed a motion to suppress for lack of probable cause because almost always the probable cause in possession cases like these is odor or smell of the drug so this case was different. Needless to say, the case was dismissed.
Client charged with shoplifting. First court appearance the witness who was also the complainant was not noticed and I insisted that he show up. Second appearance the complainant’s colleague appeared but not him and she couldn’t testify because she was not the one who witnessed my client steal, so it was rescheduled again. However, this time I asked the Judge to enter a trial or dismiss order the next court date. In other words, if the case doesn’t proceed to trial then the matter will be dismissed. Third court date the complainant who actually witnessed the theft did not show up and the case was dismissed. The client was happy because it wasn’t a first offense, so there was a real possibility of at least 90 days of jail as a mandatory sentence.
I recently defended a client facing charges for DUI with a reading of .24 (3 times the legal limit) with an accident. I was able to have the charges reduced down to three months loss license by getting the Alcotest reading thrown out of court.
My client’s CDS possession case was dropped because the State failed to produce necessary discovery. It normally takes more than six months or as long as a year for a case to be dismissed on such grounds. However, I got the case dismissed much sooner because I was proactive with getting the Court to sign certain Orders compelling discovery that the State was unable to produce. The matter was dismissed in under four months and my client was thrilled.
My client was accused of speeding 100/65 while his license was suspended. I requested a hearing with MVC which was granted and we were able to get the license restored.
Additionally, under State v Green, I demanded discovery for the speeding charges which was never provided. Given that the license was restored and the speeding discovery wasn’t granted the prosecutor dismissed both tickets saving my client jail and loss of his license.
My client was recently indicted for distributing five pounds of marijuana. I tried to get him into Pre Trial Intervention (PTI) but the prosecutor’s A certain complainant brought charges against my client in municipal court so I advised my client to press the same charges against the same complainant. This meant that the complainant had to get an attorney.
When we arrived in court I made a deal with the complainant’s attorney that both parties would dismiss the charges against each other; my client’s case was dismissed and he was happy that I resolved it for him.
My client was recently indicted for distributing five pounds of marijuana. I tried to get him into Pre Trial Intervention (PTI) but the prosecutor’s office rejected him; I then filed an appeal and the judge sided with us.
The reason this is a major victory is because the standard to overcome a prosecutor’s objection to PTI enrollment is so high that it’s virtually impossible to meet, and 99 out of 100 cases get rejected but this one was successful.
To be fair to my client, he did fantastic job going to rehab, finding employment, and submitting negative urine drug screens while the process was pending for over a year.
On my end, I found a few similar cases that showed defendants who did the right thing after a first criminal indictment should be given the benefit of the doubt despite prosecutor’s objections and luckily the judge agreed with us.
I defended a client against an aggravated assault charge in the second degree where the state was seeking a 5 year jail term.
I employed a private investigator who interviewed three witnesses who saw this as a mutual fight. In fact, my client tried to walk away but was followed by the other person so he fought back in self-defense.
I filed notice of the fight by mutual combat and self-defense with the prosecutor and court and the prosecutor dropped their demand of incarceration and asked if my client would agree to a pre-trial intervention program (PTI). PTI is a diversionary program that allows a person to retain a clean record without a criminal conviction so I presented it to him and he agreed to do it so he walked away with no record and no jail.
A concerned neighbor called the police after finding my client sleeping next to his vehicle with a half empty vodka bottle in his hand. After the police arrived he woke up and eventually blew three times legal limit.
Given that the police could not prove if he drank before or after he stopped driving the dui was dismissed.
I recently had a driving while under the influence of marijuana charge dismissed. The state police accused my client of driving under influence of marijuana. Their expert, however claims only two out of eight clues on walk and turn and one leg stand, and zero out of six on the horizontal gaze test were present.
Additionally, my client denied the use of marijuana and refused to provide them with urine sample to test for marijuana; unlike the Alcotest machine, we are not under any obligation to provide urine samples to law enforcement so he did nothing wrong by refusing in this case. Given all of the foregoing I was able to persuade the prosecutor that the state will not be able to prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt and he dismissed it.
My client was pulled over by police for jumping a curb right in front of them; they later searched the car based on seeing vape devices in plain view but did not base their search on smell of marijuana.
Based on the excuse that the vape devices gave them probable cause, they found marijuana after searching the car.
I filed a motion to suppress which the state did not oppose so long as client pleaded to the traffic charge of careless driving for driving over the curb. My client did plead guilty and received two points on his/her license and a $200 fine but the criminal drug possession charges were all dismissed.
Criminal DUI Case
I recently represented a man charged with a second degree indictable crime of endangering welfare of child because he was allegedly drunk driving with his one year old daughter in the car with him.
Because of the nature of a second degree offense he was initially denied PTI. I filed a motion to suppress the alcotest reading and for certain discovery violations.
Based on the arguments I presented, the parties agreed to pti on a fourth degree child neglect with the lowest tier violation for dui which carries 90 days loss of license without an interlock device.
I recently defended two speeding cases, my clients were charged with going 113mph and 106 mph respectively in 65 mph zone. My client that was charged with going 113mph lost his license for only 10 days when court could take it up to 180 days and prosecutor wanted 30 days. And my client charged with driving 106mph lost his license for 5 days when prosecutor also wanted 30 days.
In both cases I filed motions because state police did not provide the necessary discovery under a case called state v green but the judges wanted to reschedule instead of grant the motion. They were spooked enough whereby they agreed to the absolute bare minimums they were willing to go given the nature of the offenses and the prosecutors position only. I didn’t push the motions and the clients agreed to accept the deals so I consider that a win in both cases.
A cop pulled my client over after claiming that he smelled marijuana on him when he walked by him inside a convenience store. Upon driving away, the cop followed my client’s car and pulled him over without committing a traffic infraction and found marijuana and paraphernalia.
My client told me that he and this officer have a history related of some trouble between my client’s brother and this officer.
I filed motion to suppress and briefed the case for the judge and introduced this ulterior motive by the officer to the court. The prosecutor and the judge agreed that the drug charges and paraphernalia should be dismissed.
I had a trial for a theft charge where the employer accused his employee, my client, of stealing from him. At trial we got two of the three counts of stealing dismissed but the judge convicted on the third count of stealing so we appealed that conviction.
At the appeal I zeroed in on the testimony that the item my client was convicted of stealing was transferred from my client to another employee and then disappeared. The state never countered this evidence so I argued that this means the State could not prove theft beyond reasonable doubt. The appellate judge agreed and dismissed the third count as well and my client is elated as you can imagine.
I got a DUI dismissed because the State Police did not provide the video and repair records for the alcotest machine. I was able to get the Judge to sign an Order that if they don’t produce it in 30 days the DUI will get dismissed. When we came back a month later I still didn’t have this highly relevant material that defense is entitled to under the court rules and case law so I made motion to dismiss mentioning the applicable rule (7:7-7) and case (State v. Stein) which the judge readily granted and the DUI was dismissed.
My client was facing cds possession charges in February 2016 whereby I immediately demanded all discovery including the lab test results of the cds. For almost a year the prosecutor kept insisting he needs more time to get the labs so I filed motion to dismiss for violating my client’s speedy trial rights in in January 2017.
We finally went to court and the prosecutor showed me lab test result confirming that the substance recovered was illegal cds (controlled dangerous substance schedule 1), however, he had no chain of custody. To make matters worse the lab test results were from April of last year and he didn’t provide it this whole entire time.
I asked to see the judge on the record and motioned to dismiss invoking my client’s speedy trial rights and the judge granted my request.
I recently got an Alcotest reading thrown out for my client in a dui case. The machine failed in one station so they took my client to another, but they did not observe him for 20 minutes again before administering the second test so the reading was thrown out. This was huge for my client because his reading was three times the legal limit and the consequences for conviction would have been severe.
I represented a woman charged with refusal which carries a minimum 7 months loss of license and the installation of an interlock device. I defended her on the grounds that the police didn’t have probable cause to arrest her in first place. Additionally, even if they did have probable cause for the stop, she didn’t refuse the alcotest; the officer misunderstood her when in fact on the form she responded ‘yes’ to the test. She later pled guilty to the dui but will only serve 3 months license suspension with no interlock.
In a recent DUI case, I had a client facing cocaine possession in addition to a DUI with a .16 breathalyzer reading. I was able to get the alcotest thrown out saving him at least four months loss of license, and no interlock devise which is typically mandatory with BAC readings over .15. Overall he will face 3 months license suspension as opposed to 7 and the cocaine possession was downgraded to a conditional discharge, a diversionary program, because it was his first offense.
My client has a valid medical marijuana card from CA but their standards are much more relaxed than New Jersey’s. The Prosecutor didn’t want to dismiss on those grounds so I continued to demonstrate that I was serious about my full faith and credit argument. I was also able to show that my client was just driving through the state from Boston to Philadelphia he accepted my defenses and dismissed the charge.
My client was charged with possession but the state did not provide lab test results. I insisted that they prove to us that the contraband seized was indeed the illegal substance that they claimed it to be. They were not able to so per my motion the case was dismissed.
I recently represented a client that blew double the legal limit. Fortunately, I was able to get the Alcotest thrown out by proving that the officer violated the 20 minute observation protocol.
It was proven that the officer left the observation room twice before administering the test; kept his radio on his vest knowing that electronic communication devices are not to be in the testing room; and he didn’t start the observation period over again once he saw my client insert his fingers in his mouth.
I recently helped a client who was pulled over for weaving and subsequently blew a .03 inside the police station. They tried to charge him with dui, claiming that he was under the influence of Xanax. I filed a motion to suppress the urine sample provided because they did not have a warrant to ask for it. I kept going to court raising this defense until the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the dui.
My client was charged with refusal to submit to an Alcotest however she did not speak English, her language is Slovakian. The police called a Russian speaking officer to speak with my client but she does not speak Russian and could not understand the situation. The police arrested my client nonetheless and at the station they did not read the refusal form in her language but in English.
In NJ, you must be read certain rights and forms in a manner in which you can understand them. I was able to successfully raise the language barrier defense and the refusal charge was dismissed.
My client blew .05 into the machine which is almost half the legal limit so in the business we say that the state cannot prove its dui based on a per se violation. The state can still prove dui by the officer insisting that the client failed sfst’s however, so we came to court showing that the client wears contacts and has eye stigmatism (which would undermine their position about the HGN horizontal gaze test) and that client underwent therapy and treatment for lower extremities.
At the end of the case, although we pleaded guilty to a traffic infraction with points, there was no dui and no loss of license whatsoever.
My client was charged with exceeding the speed limit by more than 100 mph and the prosecutor insisted on him losing his license. We scheduled the case for trial but the state never provided discovery and I filed motion to dismiss for failure to provide discovery. When we appeared for trial the state still didn’t have it available so the prosecutor decided to dismiss the tickets altogether without even a trial. Needless to say the client was shocked and pleasantly surprised as well.
My client was charged with dui with a reading that made an interlock device plus 7 months loss of license mandatory. The machine at the station did not work however, and the police did not document taking the client to a different station to administer the alco test.
I used that information to undermine the state’s position that proper protocols were maintained prior to the administration of the alco test. The state agreed to extend an offer of dui with 3 months loss with no interlock based on the sfst’s (field sobriety test results) which I told my client and he accepted it.
My client is a commercial driver who was involved in an accident and was facing charges for a dui with a .23 BAC reading. First I got the Alcotest reading thrown out; with a .23 reading the officer did not put correct numbers in when he did the tolerance calculation. When I put the correct numbers in, the reading fell outside of tolerance which means that legally the reading could not be used in court.
However, they still tried to insist my client was drunk based on field sobriety test results. For my client this would have meant a year loss of license either way since he’s commercial driver and the motor vehicle commission suspends commercial drivers for a year after they plead or are found guilty of a dui.
Fortunately, the officer was not certified in administering those field sobriety tests, and he made many mistakes in his instructions to my client, so eventually the state had to concede on that as well.
Although my client pled guilty to reckless driving since there was an accident involved, he avoided a dui with the one year loss of license that it would have come with plus the $3k surcharges, the ignition interlock, the IDRC classes, etc… needless to say my client went home elated that night.
My client was charged with leaving scene accident and swore up and down that she didn’t do it; she was facing 6 months loss of license. I got the discovery and saw that the driver who was hit never saw the car that hit her. She then called her boyfriend who showed up 10 min later and saw my clients’ car in the vicinity with damage that matched the damage to their car.
We had proof from a mechanic that my client asked him for quote to fix this damage almost two weeks prior to the accident. There was also an obvious “evidential link” that was missing, namely the 10 minute gap between the accident and when my client was spotted. Based on this defense the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the charges.
My client was facing a mandatory 6 months in jail due to driving while suspended from a second dui. I filed motions to reopen the two prior duis and when that did not work I appealed those decisions successfully. The case went on for almost two years when the prosecutor finally offered a plea deal to plead guilty to a contempt charge only with 10 days of jail. Although the client still lost his license for over a year due to driving while suspended, it was for a traffic case because the criminal driving while suspended from a second dui was changed to contempt for ignoring judicial court order thus saving the client 170 days of jail. For a man who has a wife and two kids to support as well as continue with his career this was a wonderful result.
My client was charged with several drug and paraphernalia possessions from one date and then several more from a month after, this time charges included a dui. I was able to convince the county prosecutor to downgrade all of the charges back down to municipal court whereby I was able to work out a resolution for the client that all 13 drug and paraphernalia possession charges from both cases be dismissed while the client pled guilty to a dui and got the minimums. Client was elated as well as he should be.
My client was charged with dui, refusal and the criminal charge of having a child in the motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. First I succeeded in convincing the county prosecutor to remand the case back down to municipal court. In court I got the refusal dismissed while the client pleaded guilty to the dui. Unfortunately he lost his license for 3 months instead of 7 but he avoided the interlock device. The criminal charge was diverted into the conditional dismissal program whereby the client will avoid a record of conviction after completing one year probation. Good thing I got his indictable charge for a different case and a different county dismissed a year prior so he was able to avail himself of this diversionary program to avoid a record.
My client parked in a park where police suspect him of doing something wrong but can’t point the finger as to what. They proceed to follow him, after he spots them and drives away they pull him over for running a stop sign where they search the car and eventually find marijuana. I got the drug charge thrown out because they did not mention that they smelled marijuana to be able to search the vehicle therefore they did not have probable cause to search.
My client blew .16 into the alcotest machine but I got the reading tossed because correct protocol in dui cases is to maintain continuous observation of subject prior to the alcotest. Another key component of the alcotest is to remove all portable devices, such as phones and radios, from the alcotest room so they don’t interfere with the machine.
Although the officer is heard removing his portable electronic device i.e. body camera from the room the voices from the room were still being heard on the camera so I argued that it was close enough to influence the alcotest. Furthermore, when he left the room he failed to follow the proper protocol of continuously observing the client. Based on these facts the .16 reading was thrown out.
My client spoke very little English and the form that was read to him was not read to him in his native language causing confusion as to the instructions that he was given. Additionally, the police terminated the alcotest and charged him with refusal after only giving him two tries to blow in which he blew short breaths.
I argued that the language barrier, confusion surrounding the instructions and early termination of the test (under seminal dui case of State v Chun they should have given him up to 11 tries so long as he was submitting to the test and then charge him with refusal) made this charge unfounded. This argument won the day and they dismissed this refusal charge.
My client was accused of disseminating underage photos online and was facing parole supervision for life and mandatory registration as a sex offender. After taking my client to a psychiatrist and obtaining a favorable report we also sought out a professional for a lie detector test also resulting in a favorable report. With these two reports in-hand I was able to help my client avoid registration and parole with lifetime supervision with a sentence of probation only.
I recently represented a client charged with driving under the influence in a school zone and refusal to submit to a breath test. It was found that the police lacked probable cause to arrest my client for dui in the first place and all of the DUI and refusal charges were dismissed.
I represented a client for a dui and refusal (fourth offense) who was facing 10 years loss of license for each totaling 20 years plus 6 months in jail. Additionally, he was facing driving while suspended from the third dui having never restored his license and was facing 10 years and 6 months.
The first thing I did was convince the prosecutor not to indict him for driving while suspended from dui. Under State v Perry, even though he never got restored, he was restorable — he was outside of the suspended period but he never opted to restore his license. By avoiding being indicted we saved him from an additional 6 months of jail.
In court, he was still facing the dui refusal and driving while suspended which also required jail. We filed several motions for discovery and tried to get the case dismissed. We worked the matter for almost a year until finally we came to trial with our expert and the prosecutor extended a deal to my client to drop everything including the dui and driving while suspended. He 100% avoids any jail time but cannot avoid the license suspension for the refusal.
Truthfully the client preferred a couple of weeks of jail served on weekends with a year or two loss of license so I tried to convince the prosecutor to rid the refusal and dui and plead to driving while suspended. Although the prosecutor was open to this idea, the officer categorically rejected it because according to him the client “will kill someone if he continues to drive”. We accepted the offer and walked away with the license suspension but no jail time which is important to a client who is gainfully employed and has a child to support.
A client recently contacted me concerned that she had a case that is five years old and has not been disposed of in municipal court. I quickly recognized the issue that her sixth amendment constitutional speedy trial rights were being violated and, after two appearances, I got the prosecutor and judge to dismiss the case.
I recently got a client’s theft charges dropped after her boss accused her of stealing money. Before he filed the charges, my client had filed a labor complaint that he had not been paying her salary for weeks. Additionally, in the report it mentioned he initially didn’t want to press charges and just make written report of the incident.
I immediately recognized a theme that I can create around our defense– he was trying to get away with cheating her out of her salary after she filed a complaint against him with the Labor Department. What this theme creates is reasonable doubt and reasonable doubt in criminal court gets charges dropped. Needless to say the charges were dismissed in only two appearances.
I recently got an indictable criminal charge completely thrown out and dismissed. My client was a passenger in car where a pound of marijuana was found in trunk in middle of the night. The driver was taken into custody and asked for a lawyer right away and did not point a finger at my client. My client didn’t point finger at the driver and denied knowing anything about what’s in the trunk.
I filed motion to dismiss because the state could not prove possession; even if my client knew about the marijuana in the trunk he had no dominion or control over it because it was not within his wingspan. Additionally, my client was not driving the car and he did not own the car.
The presiding judge is known to be very tough on defense counsel and pro state prosecution and denied my motion to dismiss as I expected they may. We elected to take it to a higher authority, a jury. We demanded a jury trial right there and when we got our wish, the prosecutor dismissed the case on her own accord because she knew we would win.
I love this system because it allows people with competent professional legal help to get acquitted when the facts and the law are on their side.
I was hired two years ago to defend a client with a criminal drug possession charge. The prosecutor’s office forgot to prosecute my client for two years and I kept quiet all along, knowing that the longer it took them to wake up, the stronger our speedy rights violation defense would be. At the two year mark, I filed a ‘motion to dismiss’ for violating my client’s right to a speedy trial and the court granted the motion based on case law I presented (barker v. wingo and state v. cahill).
I think my client had almost lost faith long ago and thought that I had given up on defending him. I kept reassuring him that I know what I’m doing and this is best way to get the charges dropped, we just needed to not raise red flags or rock the boat and when the time comes I would do what needed to be done to get charges dropped. His faith was quickly regained when I did what I had promised.
I recently got a drug charge dismissed for evidence collection without a warrant. My client was with his partner sitting on a blanket; according to him “looking at the stars”, when a police officer came by purportedly to investigate suspicion of drug use– this was not written in his incident report. The officer immediately separated the pair and lifted the blanket and found what he found but did not mention that he had plain view or even so much as smell any drugs which may serve as an exception to the warrant requirement to search my client’s personal property. I filed a motion to suppress the evidence recovered and I did not have to even argue the motion, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the case based on the merits.
I just got a case dismissed for a client facing a 4th dui. This particular client had come to me with his 3rd dui which after losing the trial and appeal was sentenced to 6 months in jail and 10 years suspension of his license. The 4th dui came while waiting to appeal the 3rd. Upon being stopped by the police a urine analysis was conducted. My defense on the 4th dui was that the evidence (the urine sample) was collected without a warrant and that it was an invasive procedure. I argued that a person enjoys an expectation of privacy to be free from providing urine sample without a warrant unless an exception such as informed consent or exigency exists, neither of those two exceptions existed. Without a warrant I argued that the urine collection must be suppressed and the court agreed. The dui was dismissed saving my client from another six months of jail and 10 years loss of license. The remarkable aspect of this case was that the client stuck with me after we lost his 3rd dui trial and appeal. But because he saw how hard I fought for him at trial and on appeal he made the decision to stick with me to a successful resolution.
I recently represented a client for a DUI with a BAC of .15 and I got the Alcotest thrown out because the video of the processing showed that client kept putting his fingers in his mouth before the taking the test. Additionally, the officer who was administering the test kept leaving the room which meant he left the client unobserved for the required twenty minutes before taking the test. Because of those circumstances the Alcotest reading was thrown out taking the DUI down from 7 months to 3 without the interlock device.
My client was pulled over for broken taillight lamp and asked to exit the vehicle. The police patted him down and found illegal contraband in his pants pocket, whereby he was subsequently indicted by the county prosecutor for third degree possession. This exposed him to up to five years of jail. The State asked for probation but I filed a motion to suppress the pat down, arguing it was illegal and unconstitutional because the police cannot point to a reasonable and articulable suspicion that he was carrying a weapon or a danger to them to justify their frisk. Although the prosecutor objected to the motion and maintained police action was legal, on day of court he offered a downgrade to a disorderly person’s offense that carries no probation and which my client gleefully accepted.
One of my client’s was charged with second degree eluding with a DUI and a Refusal. Second degree exposes a person to 5-10 years of jail. The DUI was based on field sobriety tests and the Refusal was based on the machine generating a reading out of tolerance. I obtained the discovery but had to pull teeth to get the MVR (video of the supposed chase) and discovered that the client’s vehicle was nowhere in sight of the police cruiser until the seconds leading to him being pulling over. I argued that they wouldn’t be able to convince a jury that he was guilty of second degree eluding beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecutor agreed to dismiss the reading too because the client did not refuse to blow into the machine and it was not his fault that the machine generated an out of tolerance reading. Ultimately, we pleaded guilty to the DUI; however, because the field sobriety test results were not that great for us and since the State was working with us on the more serious charges of eluding and refusal, the client decided to plead guilty to the lowest tier DUI that only carries a 90 day loss of license. I worked on this case since September, 2014 and just got this favorable result this month.
One of my clients was charged with possession of illegal CDS that found under passenger seat of a car in which he was a passenger. I argued to the prosecutor that there is no actual possession of the drugs so he can only win if he proved constructive possession—which he couldn’t. There was a video of the stop; the driver told the cop that “everything inside is mine”, so he took ownership of whatever was in the car. As such, that meant there was no constructive possession either; the prosecutor agreed with me so he dismissed the charge.
I had a case where my client was driving while suspended. I asked the state to produce proof that they sent the client notice of the suspension; it turns out they did—however, they sent it to the wrong address. I argued to the prosecutor that due process requires notice and since my client did not have that, the charge was invalid. The prosecutor agreed, so the charges were dropped.
My client was sitting on the side of the road in the passenger seat when the police came by and decided to check on him. They attempted to charge him with DUI, however the case was dismissed not only because the police did not have probable cause to “stop” him but also because the police did NOT witness him operating the vehicle.
In a recent case involving ‘Leaving the Scene of an Accident’, I was able to get the charges dismissed for my client. Leaving scene of an accident is a serious ticket because it carries mandatory six months loss of license at a minimum not to mention MVC points. The key in this case was filing our own tickets against the other driver in a timely matter (30 days). The other driver’s attorney agreed to dismiss his tickets if we agreed to dismiss ours.
Client suspected of DUI after an accident, I was able to get the charges dismissed. My client hit a pole and the police didn’t get a warrant for a blood draw they just had my client sign a consent form. I took the position that if the Judge wouldn’t accept a guilty plea in court of a defendant he suspects is under the influence why should the police be allowed to ask for written consent from a defendant who they suspect is under the influence instead of get a legal warrant to draw the blood. Unfortunately the Judge was only half impressed with this argument; what won everyone over was that the results did not show any alcohol. Only illegal substances were found in my clients system however, without a physical evaluation they could not prove that the drugs were in her system at the time of the crash or from the 48-72 hours before. The DUI based on the blood test results were dismissed.
Client suspected of DUI, I was able to get the Alcotest thrown out because of inconsistencies in the reports. The officer wrote on report he finished 20 minute observation period at 1:35 prior to administering the Alcotest but the AIR (alcohol influence report) had the first breath test at 1:42 so there was 7 minute gap of time that the officer could not account for and based on that the Alcotest was thrown out.
Client facing drug possession charges. I was able to have the prosecutor eventually agree to dismiss the drug charges without even having a hearing on the matter due to lack of a search warrant.
Client facing shoplifting charges in municipal court. I was able to get a complete dismissal for lack of prosecution.
Client facing six month jail sentence with 10 year license suspension for a third offense DUI. After a 2 year battle in municipal court I was able to appeal the case to the judge and it has been dismissed.
Client employee of a store charged with shoplifting from her employer $30,000. She was facing up to five years in jail. I got the case dismissed for lack of evidence.
Illegal substances found in client’s vehicle searched subsequent to stop and arrest for driving while suspended. Client facing up to six months in jail. I got the case dismissed for illegal search and seizure.
Client facing up to one year loss of license for driving on a curb while under the influence (prescription medication). I got the case dismissed after convincing the prosecutor that without a drug recognition expert the state has no shot at winning.
Client charged with official misconduct facing up to 10 years in jail. I got the case downgraded to a petty disorderly persons offense without him having to serve a single day in jail.
Client charged with DUI and drug possession facing between 13 months to 31 months loss of license and up to six months in jail. Through aggressive advocacy and the engagement of an expert to help win the case, the drug charge was dismissed and client avoided jail while losing his license to drive for only three months.
Client charged with driving without insurance and driving while suspended facing 18 months loss of license. Through my representation the driving while suspended was dismissed – lack of notice – and the no insurance charge downgraded to failure to exhibit without her having to lose her license.
Drug charge dismissed for lack of probable cause to effectuate a motor vehicle stop by police. Officer pulled client over because he looked suspicious to him while driving through a known drug area. Case dismissed following aggressive defense because it is unconstitutional for police to act on a hunch without reasonable suspicion.
Drug case dismissed after an illegal pat down by police. Through aggressive representation we were able to demonstrate to the court that the police did not have a reasonably articulable suspicion of criminal activity that would warrant a pat down. Consequently, all evidence recovered was inadmissible.
Client charged with violation of restraining order found not guilty after trial because of an aggressive defense that was mounted on client’s behalf.
Client charged with second degree unlawful gun possession charge indictment dismissed after motion to dismiss filed and successfully argued on behalf of client.
Client is suspected of prostitution and drugs simply because her car was parked with an open door in a motel known for such activity. Police pull her over later in the evening under the pretext that she failed to signal a turn; however they don’t find evidence of prostitution or drugs, instead they smell alcohol and they administer the field sobriety tests and arrest her for DUI. She later blows a .06 inside the police station (which is below the limit) yet in court they insisted that she was guilty of dui because she failed the field sobriety tests. I continued to contest the case until they went down to reckless with 90 days suspension, which I rejected and eventually they offered a reckless with 30 days which the client was on the fence about taking. I kept insisting to the prosecutor that they have no case and kept raising all my legal defenses until the State (prosecutor and arresting officer) finally agreed to drop the DUI with no loss of license whatsoever. Although the client did plead guilty to reckless with five points, she walked away with zero loss of license. It wasn’t easy to convince the Judge to accept the deal, but later on he did.
During what started off as a routine traffic stop, the police officer searched my client’s vehicle without a warrant. The officer claimed the client gave him permission to do so, though there was no video and he did not obtain written and signed consent either. While performing this undocumented search, drugs were discovered in the car and my client was arrested and charged with possession.
I motioned the court to dismiss the charges based on the fact that the search was warrantless and there was no evidence of verbal consent. Because I had made a strong, clear case for this, the Judge granted it.
Police recently searched one of my client’s car without a warrant found cocaine so I filed motion to suppress. They also charged my client with dui but not for alcohol but for being under influence of cocaine. I filed motion compel discovery for all of the officer’s past opinions about drivers under influence of cocaine and the court signed the order to turn over this information. When the police failed to do so the judge dismissed the dui.
In exchange for the state dismissing the drug charge as well and not going through the motion to suppress my client pled guilty to reckless driving and the judge took his license for 90 days.