Disclaimer - Results depend upon factors unique to each case and that results in one case do not predict similar results in others.
DISMISSED – Hit and Run, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 9881)
DISMISSED – Hit and Run, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 9881) (Phoenix City Court No. 4293650): Police received a call that an individual had found a vehicle that he thought was involved in an accident the night before at 35th Ave and Julie Dr., Phoenix. The officer’s found the vehicle and photographed some damage. They then contacted Mr. G, and he admitted to the actual accident. We were able to file a Motion to Suppress all Statements based upon Corpus Delicti. Without the actual statements and an eye witness identification, the State was unable to make their case and they were forced to dismiss all charges.
DISMISSED – Hit and Run, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 9800)
DISMISSED – Hit and Run, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 9800) (Phoenix Police DR# 2010-01460055): Mr. H. was 18 years old and was driving to a friend’s house, when a light turned green and he began driving. A gentleman stepped in front of his car, and was bumped by the car and did not fall to the ground. The two exchanged words and Mr. H drove away. A police report was taken claiming that the alleged victims suffered a swollen wrist and that there was a Hit and Run. We were able to convince the Police Officers that this did not qualify as a true Hit and Run case, and they did not route the case for prosecution to the City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office.
NOT CHARGED – Hit & Run, State v. Ms. J. (DMC. No. 9926)
NOT CHARGED – Hit & Run, State v. Ms. J. (DMC. No. 9926) (Hassayampa Justice Court No. TR2010-150421): An anonymous caller called 911 and stated that Ms. J had struck another vehicle. An officer went to the scene and saw Ms. J’s vehicle, and then he claims he stopped it because the word “Arizona” was covered by her license plate cover. She denied that she had been in an accident, however she did admit to drinking. Breath test was administered which revealed a .169 BAC. Due to issues with identification, the hit and run charges had to be dismissed. In regards to the Extreme DUI, that was reduced to a regular DUI and Ms. J only did 1 day in jail instead of 30.
DISMISSED – Hit and Run, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7194)
DISMISSED – Hit and Run, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7194) (Dreamy Draw Justice Court No. JC2006-160203): Mr. S. was involved in a side-wipe collision with another vehicle. Immediately after the collision, Mr. S. threw a bottle filled with red liquid at the alleged victim. He subsequently left the scene without exchanging information. When he was charged with Hit and Run, and Assault, we were able to show that the actual collision was not his fault. However, his behavior afterward did result in a misdemeanor assault charge with a minor fine being imposed. This did not affect his insurance or his driver’s license.
NOT CHARGED – Hit & Run, State v. Mr. O.
(DMC No. 7059) (Mesa Police Department): Mr. O.’s vehicle was seen by a witness making a wide turn, running through a brick wall, and then catching on fire. Multiple people got out of the vehicle and left the area. The police contacted Mr. O. (because he was the vehicle’s owner) and he refused to speak with police. The owner of the wall later talked with Mr. O., and Mr. O. allegedly admitted to driving. We were able to provide insurance information to the victim, and convince the Mesa City Prosecutor’s Office not to file charges.
NOT CHARGED – Hit & Run, State v. Mr. S.
(DMC No. 7092) (City of Phoenix): Mr. S. was involved in an accident with some parked cars in his apartment complex’s parking garage. He subsequently parked his car and was walking to his apartment when a security guard came up and questioned him. Mr. S. claimed that somebody else was driving the vehicle and had left. Later he was contacted by police and he initially lied. He subsequently admitted to being the driver. We contacted police and provided his insurance information. A decision was made by the City of Phoenix Prosecutor not to press charges.
