<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Law Offices Of David Michael Cantor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dmcantor.com/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dmcantor.com</link>
	<description>Phoenix DUI Lawyer and Arizona Criminal Attorney with AV Rating</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 17:16:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Attempted Child Prostitution Dismissed with Predjudice</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/attempted-child-prostitution-conviction-reversed-dismissed-with-predjudice</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/attempted-child-prostitution-conviction-reversed-dismissed-with-predjudice#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 21:32:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[22 Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct With Minor Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[36 Prostitution Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7544</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ATTEMPTED CHILD PROSTITUTION CONVICTIONS REVERSED, CASE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE &#038; ARREST RECORD CLEARED – State v. Mr. M (DMC Case #:) Mr. M. pled guilty to two counts of Attempted Child Prostitution. Despite the fact that Mr. M. was adamant [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>ATTEMPTED CHILD PROSTITUTION CONVICTIONS REVERSED, CASE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE &#038; ARREST RECORD CLEARED – State v. Mr. M (DMC Case #:)</strong></p>
<p>Mr. M. pled guilty to two counts of Attempted Child Prostitution.  Despite the fact that Mr. M. was adamant during the change of plea proceedings that he did not know the alleged victim was under the age of 18, the Court accepted his pleas of guilty and sentenced Mr. M. to five (5) years of supervised probation.  Along with the probation term, Mr. M. was required to serve one (1) year in the Maricopa County Jail and was mandated to register as a sex offender, a lifetime requirement.  During the time that Mr. M. was serving his one year jail sentence, he retained the services of The Law Offices of David Michael Cantor in order to file a Petition for Post Conviction Relief, pursuant to Rule 32 of the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure.  Our firm filed this petition with the sentencing judge on Mr. M.’s behalf, arguing that the crime of child prostitution is not a strict liability offense and given Mr. M.’s clear statements that he did not know that the alleged victim was under the age of 18, the conviction should be reversed based on an insufficient factual basis.  After this request was denied by the sentencing judge, we took the issue to the Court of Appeals by filing a Petition for Review of the Superior Courts Denial of Post Conviction Relief.  After review of the pleadings, the Court of Appeals and the State agreed with our position that there was not a sufficient factual basis to support the guilty pleas and thus, the conviction was reversed and the case was remanded back to the Superior Court for a new trial.  Once remanded, and based on the arguments set forth in the post conviction pleadings, the State filed a motion to dismiss the case with prejudice, which was granted by the Court.  After this dismissal, our firm was successful in having Mr. M.’s arrest record cleared after we filed a Motion to Clear Mr. M.’s Arrest Record pursuant to A.R.S. §13-4051. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/attempted-child-prostitution-conviction-reversed-dismissed-with-predjudice/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI Not Guilty at Trail &#8211; State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 10544)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/arizona-dui-not-guilty-at-trial-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-10544</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/arizona-dui-not-guilty-at-trial-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-10544#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 19:56:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1 DUI Jury Trial Complete Acquittals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1000 Complete Acquittals/All Charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jury Trial Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI- NOT GUILTY AT TRIAL- State v. Mr. B. (San Tan Justice Court No. TR-2011-146484):  Mr. B. had been drinking at the Salt River and was stopped by the highway patrol.  The officer noted signs and symptoms of impairment and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>DUI- NOT GUILTY AT TRIAL- State v. Mr. B. (San Tan Justice Court No. TR-2011-146484):</strong>  Mr. B. had been drinking at the Salt River and was stopped by the highway patrol.  The officer noted signs and symptoms of impairment and a DUI investigation ensued.  Mr. B. submitted to a breath test that resulted in alcohol content readings of .107 and .104.  Mr. B. was charged with two counts of DUI.  The State did not offer Mr. B. a significant plea offer.  At trial, after attacking the credibility the breath sample, the jury found Mr. B. not guilty of all the DUI charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/arizona-dui-not-guilty-at-trial-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-10544/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI DISMISSED Phoenix Court &#8211; No Proof of Driving</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-dismissed-phoenix-court-no-proof-of-driving</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-dismissed-phoenix-court-no-proof-of-driving#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 01:35:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3 DUI Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7481</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. A (Phoenix Municipal Court No. M-0741-4490506): Mr. A was stopped while sitting in his car in the parking lot of a restaurant. The restaurant manager had called 911 and reported that Mr. A was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. A (Phoenix Municipal Court No. M-0741-4490506):  Mr. A was stopped while sitting in his car in the parking lot of a restaurant.  The restaurant manager had called 911 and reported that Mr. A was impaired.  The officer claimed he had bloodshot, watery eyes and an odor of alcohol.  During the eye test (HGN), Mr. A exhibited all 6 out of 6 cues and performed poorly on the other field sobriety tests (FSTs).  Although Mr. A had a low BAC, his blood results showed the presence of marijuana.  However, due to our arguments to the prosecutor that there was no proof of driving (actual physical control), the State dismissed all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-dismissed-phoenix-court-no-proof-of-driving/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI DISMISSED Phoenix Municipal Court</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-dismissed-phoenix-municipal-court</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-dismissed-phoenix-municipal-court#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3 DUI Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7474</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. C. (Phoenix Municipal Court No. 4404265): Mr. C. was stopped for allegedly having an obstructed plate. When the officer stopped him, he claimed Mr. C. had watery, bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. C. (Phoenix Municipal Court No. 4404265):  Mr. C. was stopped for allegedly having an obstructed plate.  When the officer stopped him, he claimed Mr. C. had watery, bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol.  During the eye test (HGN), Mr. C. exhibited 6 cues out of 6. After setting Mr. C.’s case to trial and filing three separate evidentiary motions regarding no reasonable suspicion for the stop, no probable cause for the arrest, and a violation of his right to counsel, the State dismissed all criminal charges.  Following the dismissal on criminal charges, a separate civil traffic hearing was set.  At the hearing, the officer requested not to proceed and Mr. C.’s civil charge was also dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-dismissed-phoenix-municipal-court/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SECOND OFFENSE DUI REDUCED Chandler Court</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/second-offense-dui-reduced-chandler-court</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/second-offense-dui-reduced-chandler-court#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:46:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7472</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SECOND OFFENSE DUI REDUCED to FIRST OFFENSE REGULAR DUI- State v. Mr. M. &#8211; (Chandler Court- No.:11-P-879920): Mr. C. was originally offered a second offense regular dui. Mr. C. performed fair on field sobriety test and was arrested, and subsequently [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SECOND OFFENSE DUI REDUCED to FIRST OFFENSE REGULAR DUI- State v. Mr. M. &#8211; (Chandler Court- No.:11-P-879920): Mr. C. was originally offered a second offense regular dui. Mr. C. performed fair on field sobriety test and was arrested, and subsequently submitted to a blood test which yielded a positive metabolite of THC.  After filing a Motion to Dismiss for no Reasonable Suspicion for the Stop and No Probable Cause for the Arrest, the State agreed to offer a plea to a first offense regular DUI, with one day of jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/second-offense-dui-reduced-chandler-court/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SUPER EXTREME DUI REDUCED Scottsdale Court</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/super-extreme-dui-reduced-scottsdale-court</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/super-extreme-dui-reduced-scottsdale-court#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:42:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7469</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPER EXTREME DUI REDUCED to REGULAR DUI- State v. Mr. A. &#8211; (Scottsdale Court- No.:TR-2011-020850): Mr. A. was originally offered a regular extreme dui. Mr. A performed poorly on field sobriety test and was arrested, and subsequently submitted to a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SUPER EXTREME DUI REDUCED to REGULAR DUI- State v. Mr. A. &#8211; (Scottsdale Court- No.:TR-2011-020850): Mr. A. was originally offered a regular extreme dui. Mr. A performed poorly on field sobriety test and was arrested, and subsequently submitted to a blood test which resulted in a .208 BAC.  After filing a Motion to Preclude arresting Officer for failure to submit to a pretrial interview, the State agreed to offer a plea to a non-extreme DUI, one day with 29 days of home detention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/super-extreme-dui-reduced-scottsdale-court/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>State V. Mr. C. (DMC No.      )</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-guilty-complete-acquittal-state-v-mr-c-dui-dwi-119-blood-phoenix-city-court-case-no-4391563</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-guilty-complete-acquittal-state-v-mr-c-dui-dwi-119-blood-phoenix-city-court-case-no-4391563#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 20:23:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1 DUI Jury Trial Complete Acquittals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1000 Complete Acquittals/All Charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jury Trial Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7411</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not Guilty / Complete Acquittal State V. Mr. C. (DMC No. ) DUI &#038; DWI (.119 Blood) Phoenix City Court (Case No. 4391563)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not Guilty / Complete Acquittal<br />
State V. Mr. C. (DMC No.      )<br />
DUI &#038; DWI (.119 Blood)<br />
Phoenix City Court (Case No. 4391563)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-guilty-complete-acquittal-state-v-mr-c-dui-dwi-119-blood-phoenix-city-court-case-no-4391563/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>State V. Mr. V. (DMC No. 10437)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-guilty-complete-acquittal-state-v-mr-v-dui-dwi-121-blood-phoenix-city-court-case-no-4282795</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-guilty-complete-acquittal-state-v-mr-v-dui-dwi-121-blood-phoenix-city-court-case-no-4282795#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 23:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1 DUI Jury Trial Complete Acquittals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1000 Complete Acquittals/All Charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jury Trial Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7402</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not Guilty / Complete Acquittal State V. Mr. V. (DMC No. 10437) DUI &#038; DWI (.121 Blood) Phoenix City Court (Case No. 4282795)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not Guilty / Complete Acquittal<br />
State V. Mr. V. (DMC No. 10437)<br />
DUI &#038; DWI (.121 Blood)<br />
Phoenix City Court (Case No. 4282795)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-guilty-complete-acquittal-state-v-mr-v-dui-dwi-121-blood-phoenix-city-court-case-no-4282795/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Apache Junction AZ DUI DISMISSED</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/apache-junction-az-dui-dismissed</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/apache-junction-az-dui-dismissed#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3 DUI Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7274</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7172) (Apache Junction Justice Court No. TR06-0019): Mr. D was seen by an officer travelling at a high rate of speed, when he suddenly hit his brakes and did a squealing [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7172) (Apache Junction Justice Court No. TR06-0019):  Mr. D was seen by an officer travelling at a high rate of speed, when he suddenly hit his brakes and did a squealing tire U-Turn. He came to a stop in the middle of the road and the officer contacted him. He later arrested Mr. D for Reckless Driving and DUI Drugs (Suspected Stimulants). During the course of the case, the Pinal County Attorney’s Office violated Mr. D’s Speedy Trial Rights; we filed a Motion to Dismiss due to a Rule 8 Violation. The court granted our motion, and all charges have been dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/apache-junction-az-dui-dismissed/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Glendale AZ DUI DISMISSED</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/glendale-az-dui-dismissed</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/glendale-az-dui-dismissed#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:17:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3 DUI Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7272</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7291) (Glendale City Court No. TR06-26138): Mr. H. was involved in a single vehicle accident in which he struck a power pole in the City of Glendale. Paramedics had to forcibly [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI DISMISSED – State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7291) (Glendale City Court No. TR06-26138):  Mr. H. was involved in a single vehicle accident in which he struck a power pole in the City of Glendale. Paramedics had to forcibly remove him from the vehicle, and the officer assisted in holding him down while he was strapped to a back board and taken to the hospital. Although the officer observed no signs and symptoms of alcohol or drug impairment, he still requested a blood test from Mr. H. We filed a Motion to Suppress the results of the blood test due to a lack of Probable Cause to Invoke the Implied Consent Law. Although Mr. H. had a prior DUI, was currently on probation for a felony drug charge and had Methamphetamine in his blood test, the Judge still agreed with our motion and after an Evidentiary Hearing suppressed the result of his blood test. The Prosecution then moved to Dismiss All Charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/glendale-az-dui-dismissed/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Phoenix Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-3</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-3#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7270</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 7125) ( Phoenix City Court No. 3576784): Police responded to the call of a non-injury accident involving 2 vehicles. When they arrived, Mr. G was outside of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 7125) ( Phoenix City Court No. 3576784): Police responded to the call of a non-injury accident involving 2 vehicles. When they arrived, Mr. G was outside of his vehicle in the parking lot. The officers noticed that Mr. G smelled of alcohol and they arrested him for DUI. At the station he provided a .182 breath alcohol reading. He also stated “at what point should I Lawyer-up?”, and the officer’s did not clarify whether he wished to speak to counsel. Due to a potential Denial of Right to Counsel issue, we were able to secure a Regular DUI with only 1 day in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-3/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>University Lakes Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:47:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7164) (University Lakes Justice Court No. TR2007-101101): Mr. M. was stopped for allegedly travelling 90mph on Baseline and Elliot Roads. After he was arrested, he provided a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7164) (University Lakes Justice Court No. TR2007-101101): Mr. M. was stopped for allegedly travelling 90mph on Baseline and Elliot Roads. After he was arrested, he provided a Breath Alcohol Content of .166. What was unusual about this case is that the stop occurred on Dec. 24th, but the report was not written until Jan. 7th. In addition, Mr. M spoke primarily Spanish, yet the DMV paperwork was read to him in English. We were able to convince the Prosecutor to offer a Regular DUI with 1 day in jail instead of a potential 30 days in jail. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Phoenix Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7266</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7182) (Phoenix City Court No. 13382953): A Phoenix Police Officer alleged that Mr. S had made a left-turn in front of another vehicle. Mr. S disputed this, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7182) (Phoenix City Court No. 13382953): A Phoenix Police Officer alleged that Mr. S had made a left-turn in front of another vehicle. Mr. S disputed this, yet he acknowledged having several drinks. He was ultimately arrested and taken to the station where he provided a .177 breath test. Due to the issue regarding whether Mr. S had really cut anyone off, there was a potential No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop motion which could be filed. The Prosecutor relented and offered a Regular DUI with only 2 days in jail. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>North Valley Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/north-valley-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/north-valley-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:46:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7264</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Ms. M. (DMC No. 7185) (North Valley Justice Court No. TR2007-117531): Ms. M was observed travelling westbound on the 101 Freeway and allegedly weaving between her lane and another. She was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Ms. M. (DMC No. 7185) (North Valley Justice Court No. TR2007-117531): Ms. M was observed travelling westbound on the 101 Freeway and allegedly weaving between her lane and another. She was subsequently stopped and arrested for DUI. She refused to provide a blood sample and a Search Warrant was obtained. When blood was drawn, it revealed a .170 Blood Alcohol Content. Because of possible issues with No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop, we were able to secure an offer to a Regular DUI with 1 day in jail instead of a potential 30. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/north-valley-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Phoenix Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:45:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI –State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 7221) ( Phoenix City Court No. 3636999): Mr. K was allegedly observed travelling 100mph down the I-17. After he was stopped, he was arrested for an alleged DUI [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI –State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 7221) ( Phoenix City Court No. 3636999): Mr. K was allegedly observed travelling 100mph down the I-17. After he was stopped, he was arrested for an alleged DUI and he provided a .166 Breath Alcohol Concentration. We were able to convince the Prosecutor there were potential issues with the breath test reading, and they agreed to offer a non-Extreme DUI. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/phoenix-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Glendale Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Misdemeanor Endangerment</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/glendale-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-misdemeanor-endangerment</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/glendale-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-misdemeanor-endangerment#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7260</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Misdemeanor Endangerment – State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7226) (Glendale City Court No. TR2007-000596): Police received a call of impaired persons inside a car at a gas station. When police arrived, they saw the vehicle [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Misdemeanor Endangerment – State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7226) (Glendale City Court No. TR2007-000596): Police received a call of impaired persons inside a car at a gas station. When police arrived, they saw the vehicle exiting the parking lot and they stopped Mr. D. He was subsequently given a breath test which revealed a .212 Breath Alcohol Concentration. Even though Mr. D had a prior Reckless Driving within the previous 2 years, due to the fact that the stop was questionable and the potential Denial of Right to Counsel issue, we had the case reduced to a non-DUI charge of Misdemeanor Endangerment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/glendale-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-misdemeanor-endangerment/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gilbert Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/gilbert-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/gilbert-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7258</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7229) (Gilbert City Court No. 07-TR-0229DU): Mr. S was observed weaving within his lane when he was stopped by a Phoenix Police Officer in Gilbert who was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7229) (Gilbert City Court No. 07-TR-0229DU): Mr. S was observed weaving within his lane when he was stopped by a Phoenix Police Officer in Gilbert who was part of the East Valley DUI Task Force. Mr. S performed fairly well on Field Sobriety Tests, but he was arrested anyway. He subsequently provided a Breath Alcohol Concentration of  .162. Due to issues with the breath testing device, coupled with his good performance on Field Sobriety Tests, we were able to secure an offer to Regular DUI and 3 days in jail. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/gilbert-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tempe Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:43:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7256</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. N. (DMC No. 7230) (Tempe City Court No. 07-981603): Police were called because it was alleged that Mr. N drove his vehicle towards a girl’s vehicle. Her fiancé then became [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. N. (DMC No. 7230) (Tempe City Court No. 07-981603): Police were called because it was alleged that Mr. N drove his vehicle towards a girl’s vehicle. Her fiancé then became upset and the 2 exchanged words. Even though Mr. N stated that he was merely “kidding around”, the 2 men got into a fight. Once police arrived, they arrested Mr. N and took him to the station where he provided a .177 Breath Alcohol Content. Due to various witness issues we were able to convince the Prosecutor to extend an offer to a Regular DUI with 2 days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tempe Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:42:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7254</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving – State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7233) (Tempe City Court No. 07-979202): Police were called to the scene of an accident in which it was alleged that Mr. M had struck 2 parked [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving – State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7233) (Tempe City Court No. 07-979202): Police were called to the scene of an accident in which it was alleged that Mr. M had struck 2 parked vehicles in a parking lot. When they arrived, Mr. M. was outside of the vehicle and would not make any statements. He subsequently was arrested and taken to the station where he provided a .175 Breath Alcohol Content. Because of problems with Independent Witnesses being able to identify client as the driver, we were able to secure an offer to a Reckless Driving. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scottsdale Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to a Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-a-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-a-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:42:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7252</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to a Regular DUI &#8211; State v. Mr. J. (DMC No. 7236) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR2006-030767): Mr. J was observed travelling 56 in a 40mph zone. He was subsequently stopped and denied drinking alcohol. After he [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to a Regular DUI &#8211; State v. Mr. J. (DMC No. 7236) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR2006-030767): Mr. J was observed travelling 56 in a 40mph zone. He was subsequently stopped and denied drinking alcohol. After he was arrested and taken to the station, blood draw was conducted which revealed .177 Blood Alcohol Content. Due to the fact that the inner box of the blood kit was not properly marked with the client’s name or the Police Report number, we were able to secure an offer to a Regular DUI with only 5 days in jail. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-a-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>North Valley Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/north-valley-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/north-valley-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:41:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7250</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 7283) (North Valley Justice Court No. TR2007-1277140): Mr. B was observed stopped in the middle of the road on Happy Valley Rd. The officer honked his horn [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 7283) (North Valley Justice Court No. TR2007-1277140): Mr. B was observed stopped in the middle of the road on Happy Valley Rd. The officer honked his horn and had Mr. B pull off the roadway. He subsequently noticed that Mr. B had been drinking, and he arrested him for DUI. Once at the station Mr. B provided a .176 breath alcohol reading. Because Mr. B was a student and the Extreme DUI would have such negative consequences, we were able to convince the Deputy County Attorney to offer a Regular DUI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/north-valley-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chandler Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/chandler-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/chandler-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:40:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7248</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 7284) (Chandler City Court No. 07-C-2918892): Mr. W was stopped for driving without his taillights on. Once he was stopped, they asked if he had been drinking [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 7284) (Chandler City Court No. 07-C-2918892): Mr. W was stopped for driving without his taillights on. Once he was stopped, they asked if he had been drinking and he stated “probably too much to be driving”. He subsequently was arrested and taken to the station which he provided a .187 Blood Alcohol Content. Because Mr. W is an Airline Pilot and an Extreme DUI Conviction would have harsh consequences on his ability to earn a living, we were able to secure a deviation offer from the Prosecutor to a Regular DUI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/chandler-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chandler Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/chandler-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/chandler-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:38:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7246</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Ms. N. (DMC No. 7290) (Chandler City Court No. 07-C-2968751): Ms. N. was observed making a wide left turn by an officer in Chandler. She was subsequently and provided a Preliminary [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Ms. N. (DMC No. 7290) (Chandler City Court No. 07-C-2968751): Ms. N. was observed making a wide left turn by an officer in Chandler. She was subsequently and provided a Preliminary Breath Test of .167. Because of issues regarding a potential of No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop, and the fact she kept her leg up all 30 seconds on the one-leg-stand, we were able to convince the Prosecutor to offer a Regular DUI with 1 day in jail instead of an Extreme DUI with 30 days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/chandler-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wickenburg Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/wickenburg-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/wickenburg-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:37:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7244</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 7305) (Wickenburg City Court No. TR2007-0495): A police officer was contacted by a citizen in a Basha’s parking lot, who claimed they saw Mr. P driving impaired. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI – State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 7305) (Wickenburg City Court No. TR2007-0495): A police officer was contacted by a citizen in a Basha’s parking lot, who claimed they saw Mr. P driving impaired. The officer observed Mr. P enter his vehicle and then pull out of the parking lot. He was subsequently stopped and arrested for a DUI which revealed a .182 breath alcohol reading. We were able to show that this neutral “civilian witness” was actually the daughter of the woman that Mr. P had been dating. She apparently had a grudge against Mr. P. In addition, there were issues with finding the video tape of the stop that the officer should have maintained with his patrol car. We were able to convince the Prosecutor’s to offer a regular DUI and 1 day in jail instead of an Extreme with possibly 30 days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/wickenburg-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>University Lakes Arizona EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:36:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7242</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI &#8211; State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7306) (University Lakes Justice Court No. TR2007-124818): Mr. S was pulled over making a wide turn from University to Rural Rd. in Tempe. Because this was during [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXTREME DUI REDUCED to Regular DUI &#8211; State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7306) (University Lakes Justice Court No. TR2007-124818): Mr. S was pulled over making a wide turn from University to Rural Rd. in Tempe. Because this was during the East Valley DUI Task Force, he was subsequently arrested for DUI and transferred to the Gilbert Command Center. He initially refused to take a breath test, and a warrant was obtained and his blood was drawn. His blood result revealed a .157 and he was cited for Extreme DUI. Due to the issues with the blood test which could allow us to show it was below the Extreme DUI limit, we received an offer to a regular DUI and 1 day in jail instead of a potential 30.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-extreme-dui-reduced-to-regular-dui/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-s-4</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-s-4#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:34:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7239</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7175) (McDowell Mountain Justice Court No. TR2006-173848): Police were called by a Civilian that reported Mr. S running a red light, then pulling off the road suddenly and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7175) (McDowell Mountain Justice Court No. TR2006-173848): Police were called by a Civilian that reported Mr. S running a red light, then pulling off the road suddenly and stopping. When police arrived the Civilian Witness was there, and Mr. S was still behind the wheel of his car. He appeared to be impaired by alcohol and he told the officer’s that he had pulled over in order to “sleep it off”. Because a Civilian had actually seen him driving, the affects of a Corpus Delicti and lack of Actual Physical Control defeense were greatly diminished. Even though Mr. S had 3 prior DUI’s and 1 prior Reckless Driving, we were still able to secure a Reckless Driving Plea which involved no jail time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-s-4/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. M.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-m-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-m-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:33:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7187) (Tempe City Court No. 06-963584): Mr. M was stopped for allegedly doing 62 in a 35. After he was stopped it was determined he was under 21, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7187) (Tempe City Court No. 06-963584):  Mr. M was stopped for allegedly doing 62 in a 35. After he was stopped it was determined he was under 21, but had been drinking. He was arrested for DUI and provided a breath sample that was below the legal limit. Even though he could still be convicted of an Underage Drink and Driving, we convinced the Prosecutor to extend a Reckless Driving offer which only involved classes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-m-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. M.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-m-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-m-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7235</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7228) (University Lakes Justice Court No. TR2007-107320): Mr. M was observed making a wide right turn on University Dr. off of Rural Rd. After being stopped, the officer [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 7228) (University Lakes Justice Court No. TR2007-107320): Mr. M was observed making a wide right turn on University Dr. off of Rural Rd. After being stopped, the officer had Mr. H perform Field Sobriety Tests and claimed that he was impaired. Once he was given a breath test it revealed that he was only a .071 Breath Alcohol Content. We were able to convince the Prosecutor that they would lose at trial, and they extended a 0 days in jail Reckless Driving offer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/university-lakes-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-m-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving on the Day of Trial</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempedui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-on-the-day-of-trial</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempedui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-on-the-day-of-trial#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:30:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7233</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving on the Day of Trial &#8211; State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 7239) (Tempe City Court No. 06-950941): Mr. K was pulled over for allegedly not having his headlights on. Subsequently, he was given a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving on the Day of Trial &#8211; State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 7239) (Tempe City Court No. 06-950941):  Mr. K was pulled over for allegedly not having his headlights on. Subsequently, he was given a Preliminary Breath Test which revealed a .217 Breath Alcohol Content. However, he had clear speech and no trouble on the majority of Field Sobriety Tests. Once at the station he provided a Breath Test on a machine that revealed a .125. That device was shown to have multiple calibration issues, and on the day of trial the Tempe City Prosecutor extended an offer of Reckless prior to picking a jury.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempedui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-on-the-day-of-trial/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. H.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-h-4</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-h-4#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:26:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7245) (Tempe City Court No. 07-983218): Mr. H was found stopped at a green light asleep with his engine on and his foot on the brake pedal. He [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7245) (Tempe City Court No. 07-983218):  Mr. H was found stopped at a green light asleep with his engine on and his foot on the brake pedal. He ultimately provided Field Sobriety Tests and a Preliminary Breath Test of .085. After he was arrested, he was taken to the station and requested to call our office. After he was done on the phone, he did not provide any answers to questions and did not perform any further tests. Due to the lack of evidence, we were able to convince the Prosecutor to extend the Reckless Driving offer with 0 days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/tempe-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-h-4/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Ms. F.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-ms-f</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-ms-f#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7227</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Ms. F. (DMC No. 7269) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR2007-013043): Officers were at 128th St. and Shea monitoring an accident when they saw Ms. F drive by without her lights on. They [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Ms. F. (DMC No. 7269) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR2007-013043): Officers were at 128th St. and Shea monitoring an accident when they saw Ms. F drive by without her lights on. They ultimately stopped her and arrested her for a DUI after she produced a Preliminary Breath Test of .103. We were able to demonstrate that she did well on the Field Sobriety Tests and that her driving was not egregious (she had simply left her lights off). Due to the fact that the State would have most likely lost at trial, they offered a Reckless Driving Plea with 0 days of jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-arizona-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-ms-f/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. B.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-b-5</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-b-5#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7225</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7282) (Scottsdale Justice Court No. TR 2007-110596): Mr. B was observed travelling eastbound on the 101 Freeway at 75mph and was supposedly driving erratically. An officer stopped him [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7282) (Scottsdale Justice Court No. TR 2007-110596): Mr. B was observed travelling eastbound on the 101 Freeway at 75mph and was supposedly driving erratically. An officer stopped him and conducted Field Sobriety Tests. He then arrested him for DUI and took him to the station where he produced a .080 breath alcohol reading. Due to the low reading, and the fact that there was no egregious driving, we were able to secure a plea to a Reckless Driving which involved no days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/scottsdale-dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-b-5/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. B.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-b-4</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-b-4#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:24:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4 DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7223</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7289) (West Mesa Justice Court No. TR2006-177490): Mr. B was seen stopped on the side of State Route 101 with a flat tire and his emergency lights on. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI REDUCED to Reckless Driving &#8211; State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7289) (West Mesa Justice Court No. TR2006-177490): Mr. B was seen stopped on the side of State Route 101 with a flat tire and his emergency lights on. The officer walked up and the engine was on, but the car was in park. Mr. B was in the car and he smelled of alcohol and was subsequently arrested for DUI. He then produced a .142 breath alcohol reading. We were able to have the case reduced to a mere Reckless Driving due to the fact that the State had problems proving Actual Physical Control and Corpus Delicti.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-reduced-to-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-b-4/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Probation Violation, State v. Ms. R. (DMC No. 9095)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dismissed-probation-violation-state-v-ms-r-dmc-no-9095</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dismissed-probation-violation-state-v-ms-r-dmc-no-9095#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Probation Violation, State v. Ms. R. (DMC No. 9095) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2006-109586): Ms. R was on probation for Burglary (a Class 3 Felony), when her Probation Officer filed a Petition to Revoke her Probation due [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Probation Violation, State v. Ms. R. (DMC No. 9095) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2006-109586): Ms. R was on probation for Burglary (a Class 3 Felony), when her Probation Officer filed a Petition to Revoke her Probation due to various violations. We were able to show that Ms. R was on Standard Probation and not Intensive Probation, so a violation of Term 17 (Consumption of Alcohol) would not result in an Automatic Revocation. In addition, there was only an admission of alcohol consumption, and not any hard evidence. The State then moved to Dismiss the Petition to Revoke, even though Ms. R was facing a potential of years in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dismissed-probation-violation-state-v-ms-r-dmc-no-9095/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Sexual Assault and Sexual Conduct with a Minor</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-sexual-assault-and-sexual-conduct-with-a-minor</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-sexual-assault-and-sexual-conduct-with-a-minor#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:29:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[23 Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct With Minor Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[29 Sexual Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[300 Sex Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7218</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Sexual Assault and Sexual Conduct with a Minor, State v. Mr. Y. (DMC No. 9806) (Maricopa County Superior Court No.: CR2010-139405): Mr. Y. was a 25 year old living in an apartment who was partying with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Sexual Assault and Sexual Conduct with a Minor, State v. Mr. Y. (DMC No. 9806) (Maricopa County Superior Court No.: CR2010-139405): Mr. Y. was a 25 year old living in an apartment who was partying with some people, including a 16 year old girl. During the course of the night, the girl and Mr. Y were drinking and ended up having sex. Although he knew she was under 18, he was under the belief that she was going to have her birthday within a couple of weeks. After Mr. Y had left the apartment, the girl spoke with her friends and then claimed that she “must have been sexually assaulted”, although she did not remember anything. After the police were called, Mr. Y was arrested. We were able to show that the sexual assault claim lacked any merit (although it carried a potential of over a decade in prison), but Mr. Y did knowingly engage in sex with a girl under 18. The original offers from the Prosecutor’s involved designated felonies and convictions with prison time. We were able to convince the Prosecutor to offer an Undesignated Felony to a Child Abuse Charge with 6 months of jail time and Work Furlough. Upon completion of Mr. Y’s probation, the charge will be reduced to a Misdemeanor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-sexual-assault-and-sexual-conduct-with-a-minor/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Possession of a Narcotic Drug</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-felony-possession-of-a-narcotic-drug</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-felony-possession-of-a-narcotic-drug#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:28:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[82 Drug Crimes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Possession of a Narcotic Drug, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No.7231) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2003-032967): Mr. D. had possessed a forged prescription and had obtained prescription drugs from a Walgreens. He subsequently [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Possession of a Narcotic Drug, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No.7231) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2003-032967): Mr. D. had possessed a forged prescription and had obtained prescription drugs from a Walgreens.  He subsequently was charged and fled the state, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.  Approximately 5 years later he was arrested and needed to deal with the charges.  We were able to convince the prosecutors that he was now a completely different man than he had been 5 years earlier, and they agreed to offer a plea to a misdemeanor of Solicitation of Narcotic Drugs.  He was able to go back to California without this affecting his job or his career.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-felony-possession-of-a-narcotic-drug/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Hindering Prosecution – Possession of Marijuana for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-hindering-prosecution-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-hindering-prosecution-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:28:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[84 Drug Sales Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7214</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Hindering Prosecution – Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Ms. H. (DMC No.9821) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2010-141585): Police Officer’s had conducted a 6 week Undercover Drug Investigation of Ms. H’s boyfriend. When the police arrived, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Hindering Prosecution – Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Ms. H. (DMC No.9821) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2010-141585): Police Officer’s had conducted a 6 week Undercover Drug Investigation of Ms. H’s boyfriend. When the police arrived, they executed a Search Warrant and found over 12 lbs of Marijuana, along with Marijuana growing equipment. We were able to show that Ms. H was not involved in the drug trade, and was not fully aware of her boyfriend’s involvement. The charges were reduced to a simple Hindering Prosecution with Probation and 0 days in jail. Originally, Ms. H was facing up to 15 years in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-hindering-prosecution-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Production and Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. R.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-production-and-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale-state-v-mr-r</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-production-and-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale-state-v-mr-r#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:27:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[83 Drug Sales Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7212</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Production and Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 9914) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2009-006670): Mr. R. had gotten into an argument with his girlfriend when the police were called. When they [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Production and Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 9914) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2009-006670): Mr. R. had gotten into an argument with his girlfriend when the police were called. When they arrived, the girlfriend’s mother told the police that Mr. R had been growing Marijuana in the shed, and had been selling Marijuana along with some Methamphetamine. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office waited almost 2 years to charge Mr. R., and in that time they had lost the video tape detailing the alleged crime scene. We then filed a Willets –a motion which would have greatly hurt the State’s case. The State was then forced to file a motion to dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-production-and-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale-state-v-mr-r/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 7293)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7293</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7293#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:26:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 7293) (San Marcos Justice Court No. 2010-106832): Mr. C. was observed travelling the wrong way on the loop 202 Freeway. He eventually struck a sign which became detached from the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 7293) (San Marcos Justice Court No. 2010-106832): Mr. C. was observed travelling the wrong way on the loop 202 Freeway. He eventually struck a sign which became detached from the ground and struck several other vehicles. He was originally charged with a DUI in City Court, but then his charge for Criminal Damage for striking the sign was filed in a Justice Court. We were able to show the Prosecutor that this was a not a true Criminal Damage, as it did not involve the requisite “intent” element necessary for the charge. We were able to have the charge of Criminal Damage Dismissed in its entirety.              </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7293/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct- State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 9801)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-9801</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-9801#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:24:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct- State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 9801) (Tempe City Court No. 2010-035486): Mr. H. was at the Big Bang Bar in Tempe when he got into an argument with some bouncers. Police walked up and claimed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct- State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 9801) (Tempe City Court No. 2010-035486): Mr. H. was at the Big Bang Bar in Tempe when he got into an argument with some bouncers. Police walked up and claimed that Mr. H walked at them aggressively. They then took him to the ground and he was arrested for disorderly conduct. We were able to show that this was all a misunderstanding fueled by alcohol, and that the case should be dismissed upon completion of some alcohol classes. Because Mr. H was a U.S. Airways employee, this result saved his job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-9801/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO CRIMINAL DAMAGE- Unlawful Imprisonment and Discharge of a Firearm</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-criminal-damage-unlawful-imprisonment-and-discharge-of-a-firearm</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-criminal-damage-unlawful-imprisonment-and-discharge-of-a-firearm#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:23:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[101 Misconduct Involving a Weapon Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED TO CRIMINAL DAMAGE- Unlawful Imprisonment and Discharge of a Firearm &#8211; State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 9922) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2010-124000): Mr. K. and his wife had been drinking with another couple when he began arguing [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED TO CRIMINAL DAMAGE- Unlawful Imprisonment and Discharge of a Firearm &#8211; State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 9922) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2010-124000): Mr. K. and his wife had been drinking with another couple when he began arguing with his own wife. At some point he left the house with the gun, and police were called. As Mr. K was walking back to his house, he saw police pulling up. An officer chased him into his house and as Mr. K was running upstairs the officer fired his gun at Mr. K. Mr. K then reflexively squeezed the trigger and shot a bullet into the roof. Because he originally was arguing with his wife and wouldn’t let her leave, they charged him with Unlawful Imprisonment along with the Unlawful Discharge of the Firearm. We were able to show that neither charge had true merit, and the Prosecutor agreed to reduce it to a Criminal Damage “Charge” which was ultimately reduced to a Misdemeanor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-criminal-damage-unlawful-imprisonment-and-discharge-of-a-firearm/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Insurance Fraud &#8211; State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 9815)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-insurance-fraud-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-9815</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-insurance-fraud-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-9815#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[114 Theft and Fraud Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[41 Theft and Fraud Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7204</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Insurance Fraud &#8211; State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 9815): Mr. S. was involved in a nasty divorce with his wife. She had stored numerous items to be resold as antiques in her house. When she left, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Insurance Fraud &#8211; State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 9815):  Mr. S. was involved in a nasty divorce with his wife. She had stored numerous items to be resold as antiques in her house. When she left, she filed an insurance claim stating that there was 40,000-50,000 in damage and theft. Mr. S reported her to the insurance company and informed them that he was the true insured party and was the one who suffered the actual loss. The insurance company tried to claim that this was somehow a fraudulent statement. We were able to show that the fact that he was a victim of theft (even though it was from his wife who he was divorcing) still entitled him to a lawful insurance claim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-insurance-fraud-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-9815/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Solicitation of Prostitution- State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 9869)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-solicitation-of-prostitution-state-v-mr-p-dmc-no-9869</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-solicitation-of-prostitution-state-v-mr-p-dmc-no-9869#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:22:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[113 Sex Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[300 Sex Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[36 Prostitution Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Solicitation of Prostitution- State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 9869): Mr. P was one of the individuals on the “Desert Diva” list that was released to the media. This list involved an escort service that was determined [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Solicitation of Prostitution- State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 9869): Mr. P was one of the individuals on the “Desert Diva” list that was released to the media. This list involved an escort service that was determined to be a prostitution ring. The police obtained all credit card numbers and information and released the names of the potential “John’s” to the public. Mr. P hired us, and we were able to prevent the State from proceeding with any further evidence that he engaged in prostitution. No charges were ever brought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-solicitation-of-prostitution-state-v-mr-p-dmc-no-9869/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Hit and Run, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 9881)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-9881</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-9881#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[11 Hit and Run Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7200</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED &#8211; 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 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED &#8211; 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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-9881/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Hit and Run, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 9800)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-9800</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-9800#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[11 Hit and Run Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7198</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED &#8211; 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 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED &#8211; 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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-9800/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Hit &amp; Run, State v. Ms. J. (DMC. No. 9926)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-hit-run-state-v-ms-j-dmc-no-9926</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-hit-run-state-v-ms-j-dmc-no-9926#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[11 Hit and Run Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Hit &#038; 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 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Hit &#038; 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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-hit-run-state-v-ms-j-dmc-no-9926/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – DUI, State v. Mr. L. (DMC No. 9825)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-dui-state-v-mr-l-dmc-no-9825</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-dui-state-v-mr-l-dmc-no-9825#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:20:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[111 Felony Aggravated DUI Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[7 DUI Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7194</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – DUI, State v. Mr. L. (DMC No. 9825) (DPS DR# 2009-022207): Mr. L was pulled over for allegedly weaving on the U.S. 60 in the area of Greenfield Rd. After he was stopped the officer smelled an [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – DUI, State v. Mr. L. (DMC No. 9825) (DPS DR# 2009-022207):  Mr. L was pulled over for allegedly weaving on the U.S. 60 in the area of Greenfield Rd. After he was stopped the officer smelled an odor of alcohol. Preliminary Breath Test was given which revealed an .083, and Field Sobriety Tests were then administered. During the time that the Prosecution was waiting for blood results, we contacted their office and were able to explain that Mr. L’s Right to Counsel was violated when he was not given a private phone call that night when he asked to speak to our office. The Prosecutor decided not to file charges. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-dui-state-v-mr-l-dmc-no-9825/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphenalia, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9840)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-drug-paraphenalia-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-9840</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-drug-paraphenalia-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-9840#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:55:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7190</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphenalia, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9840) (Chandler Police Department): Mr. C. was driving with some friends on Chandler Blvd., when they were stopped for a minor traffic violation. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphenalia, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9840) (Chandler Police Department):  Mr. C. was driving with some friends on Chandler Blvd., when they  were stopped for  a minor traffic violation. The officer smelled Marijuana and found some pot, along with a pipe. We were able to negotiate a cooperation deal with the Detective, in which in exchange for information no charges were ever brought against Mr. C. He has no conviction on his record. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-drug-paraphenalia-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-9840/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Drug Paraphenalia, State v. Mr. V. (DMC No. 9808)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-marijuana-and-drug-paraphenalia-state-v-mr-v-dmc-no-9808</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-marijuana-and-drug-paraphenalia-state-v-mr-v-dmc-no-9808#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:54:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7188</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Drug Paraphenalia, State v. Mr. V. (DMC No. 9808): Mr. V. was parked outside the Scottsdale Airport watching planes taking off and land. Federal Police came up and claimed that they smelled Marijuana. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Drug Paraphenalia, State v. Mr. V. (DMC No. 9808):  Mr. V. was parked outside the Scottsdale Airport watching planes taking off and land. Federal Police came up and claimed that they smelled Marijuana. They then searched his car and then found some Marijuana, along with a pipe. Mr. V invoked his Right to Remain Silent, and was arrested and taken to the station, where he was later released. We were able to show the Prosecution that the search may have been illegal, along with issues regarding Right to Counsel. Ultimately, they chose to not file any charges. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-marijuana-and-drug-paraphenalia-state-v-mr-v-dmc-no-9808/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EXPUNGED- AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, POSSESSION OF PRECURSOR DRUG CHEMICALS, &amp; AGGRAVATED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 9819)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/expunged-aggravated-assault-possession-of-precursor-drug-chemicals-aggravated-domestic-violence-state-v-mr-p-dmc-no-9819</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/expunged-aggravated-assault-possession-of-precursor-drug-chemicals-aggravated-domestic-violence-state-v-mr-p-dmc-no-9819#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:53:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7186</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[EXPUNGED- AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, POSSESSION OF PRECURSOR DRUG CHEMICALS, &#038; AGGRAVATED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 9819) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 1998-093342, 2003-018738, 2004-021935): Mr. P had been involved with drugs in his past, which resulted [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EXPUNGED- AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, POSSESSION OF PRECURSOR DRUG CHEMICALS, &#038; AGGRAVATED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE – State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 9819) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 1998-093342, 2003-018738, 2004-021935):  Mr. P had been involved with drugs in his past, which resulted in 3 convictions and a prison sentence. He eventually was released from prison and did extensive drug counseling. He had turned his life around and was working at a decent job, but could not be promoted up while he had felony convictions on his record. We were able to file an extensive motion which included all of his counseling records and we were able to have all of the Judgments of Guilt Set Aside. In addition, his Civil Rights were Restored.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/expunged-aggravated-assault-possession-of-precursor-drug-chemicals-aggravated-domestic-violence-state-v-mr-p-dmc-no-9819/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 8991)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-state-v-mr-w-dmc-no-8991</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-state-v-mr-w-dmc-no-8991#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:52:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[58 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[74 Resisting Arrest Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7184</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 8991) (Scottsdale City Court No. 2008-040589): Mr. W had previously been convicted of a DUI in 2008. He needed the conviction to be Set Aside in order to secure a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 8991) (Scottsdale City Court No. 2008-040589):  Mr. W had previously been convicted of a DUI in 2008. He needed the conviction to be Set Aside in order to secure a promotion in his employment. We were able to show the Judge that he had satisfied all of the penalties associated with his DUI conviction. The Judge agreed and Set Aside the Judgment of Guilt, thereby expunging Mr. W’s conviction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-state-v-mr-w-dmc-no-8991/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RESISTING ARREST/TRESPASSING/DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. H. (DMC No. 9104)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/resisting-arresttrespassingdisorderly-conduct-conviction-expunged-state-v-ms-h-dmc-no-9104</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/resisting-arresttrespassingdisorderly-conduct-conviction-expunged-state-v-ms-h-dmc-no-9104#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:51:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[58 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[74 Resisting Arrest Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7182</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RESISTING ARREST/TRESPASSING/DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. H. (DMC No. 9104) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2009-161454): Ms. H had been drinking and was at the Westgate Shops over by the Jobing.com Arena. An officer approached her outside [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RESISTING ARREST/TRESPASSING/DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. H. (DMC No. 9104) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2009-161454):  Ms. H had been drinking and was at the Westgate Shops over by the Jobing.com Arena. An officer approached her outside of a bar, and she got into a verbal altercation. The officer became angry, and pushed Ms. H to the side of the car. She reacted and then was arrested and charged with Disorderly Conduct, Trespassing, and Resisting Arrest. We were ultimately able to have charges reduced to a Class 1 Misdemeanor for Resisting Arrest. After that, we were able to have the conviction Set Aside and Expunged. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/resisting-arresttrespassingdisorderly-conduct-conviction-expunged-state-v-ms-h-dmc-no-9104/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI CONVICITION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. M. (DMC No. 9942)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-convicition-expunged-state-v-ms-m-dmc-no-9942</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-convicition-expunged-state-v-ms-m-dmc-no-9942#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI CONVICITION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. M. (DMC No. 9942) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR2008-011939): Ms. M. had been convicted of a DUI stemming from 2008. She needed to Set Aside the conviction in order to obtain meaningful employment. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI CONVICITION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. M. (DMC No. 9942) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR2008-011939):  Ms. M. had been convicted of a DUI stemming from 2008. She needed to Set Aside the conviction in order to obtain meaningful employment. We were able to file a motion showing that she had changed her life, and was now a college graduate. The Judge agreed and Set Aside her Judgment of Guilt.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dui-convicition-expunged-state-v-ms-m-dmc-no-9942/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED AT BENCH TRIAL – State v. Ms. Q (DMC No. 9937)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-at-bench-trial-state-v-ms-q-dmc-no-9937</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-at-bench-trial-state-v-ms-q-dmc-no-9937#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:48:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1200 Dismissed at Trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1300 Bench Trial Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[51 Assault/Domestic Violence Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jury Trial Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED AT BENCH TRIAL – State v. Ms. Q (DMC No. 9937) (Chandler City Court No. 10-C-3514831): Ms. Q. was engaged in argument with her husband, when she allegedly grabbed his hands as he was attempting to leave the house. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED AT BENCH TRIAL – State v. Ms. Q (DMC No. 9937) (Chandler City Court No. 10-C-3514831): Ms. Q. was engaged in argument with her husband, when she allegedly grabbed his hands as he was attempting to leave the house. The police were called, and Ms. Q’s husband then stated that he had been scratched on the face and a but in the head then pulled off his shirt. Ms. Q stated this occurred when he pushed her, she reflexively grabbed at his shirt to maintain her balance. Although the State was seeking to convict Ms. Q, this would have affected her nursing license. The case was then set to trial and when the State was unable to proceed with all their evidence, they were forced to move to dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-at-bench-trial-state-v-ms-q-dmc-no-9937/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DRIVER’S LICENSE REINSTATED – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 9907)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/drivers-license-reinstated-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-9907</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/drivers-license-reinstated-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-9907#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:46:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DRIVER’S LICENSE REINSTATED – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 9907) (Arrowhead Justice Court No. TR2009-102771): Mr. S. had previously been convicted of a DUI and his driver’s license was suspended for a period of 1 ½ years. He needed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DRIVER’S LICENSE REINSTATED – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 9907) (Arrowhead Justice Court No. TR2009-102771):  Mr. S. had previously been convicted of a DUI and his driver’s license was suspended for a period of 1 ½ years. He needed to have his license reinstated in order to seek viable employment. We sent him to a doctor who our firm utilizes in order to have him screened for alcohol abuse issues. We then prepared his packet with the DMV, submitted it, and were able to have Mr. S’s license reinstated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/drivers-license-reinstated-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-9907/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>State V. Mr. S. (DMC No. 10372)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/state-v-mr-s-dmc-no</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/state-v-mr-s-dmc-no#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1 DUI Jury Trial Complete Acquittals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1000 Complete Acquittals/All Charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jury Trial Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7170</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/state-v-mr-s-dmc-no/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Misdemeanor &amp; Probation – Felony Auto Theft, State v. Mr. H.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-probation-%e2%80%93-felony-auto-theft-state-v-mr-h</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-probation-%e2%80%93-felony-auto-theft-state-v-mr-h#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[45 Theft Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7091</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Misdemeanor &#038; Probation – Felony Auto Theft, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7129) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-101364): Mr. H. was observed with 2 others stealing a motorized scooter from a parking lot. He was caught [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Misdemeanor &#038; Probation – Felony Auto Theft, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7129) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-101364): Mr. H. was observed with 2 others stealing a motorized scooter from a parking lot.  He was caught taking the scooter to his vehicle.  He was ultimately indicted for Theft of Means of Transportation (Auto Theft), and was now facing prison time.  We were able to demonstrate that this was a prank that he and his friends were pulling at the college, and we were able to secure an offer of 18 months of probation with no jail.  At the conclusion of probation, the charge was designated a misdemeanor, thereby not leaving a felony on Mr. H.’s record.</p>
<p></p>
<div class="success-list"><a href="http://dmcantor.com#victories">Click here to see a complete list of all victories.</a></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-probation-%e2%80%93-felony-auto-theft-state-v-mr-h/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Probation – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Ms. P.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-p</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-p#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:17:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[14 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7089</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Probation – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Ms. P. (DMC No. 7150) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-006244): Ms. P. was involved in a traffic accident which resulted in 3 Counts of Aggravated Assault Dangerous, and 2 Counts [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Probation – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Ms. P. (DMC No. 7150) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-006244): Ms. P. was involved in a traffic accident which resulted in 3 Counts of Aggravated Assault Dangerous, and 2 Counts of Endangerment Dangerous.  One victim had a broken back, and another victim was ejected from her car, suffering vertebrae injuries.  The victim’s vehicle appeared to have been speeding and may have cut off Mr. P.  Because Ms. P. had been drinking alcohol, the police drew blood which resulted in a .095 BAC.  She was subsequently charged with numerous charges which could have resulted in over 50 years in prison.  Even though the initial offers started at 5 years in prison and came down to 2.5 years, we were able to conduct a Settlement Conference and ultimately secured an offer of probation with 6 months of jail with work furlough.<br />
</p>
<div class="success-list"><a href="http://dmcantor.com#victories">Click here to see a complete list of all victories.</a></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-p/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Misdemeanor DUI – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. W.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-dui-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-w</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-dui-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-w#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[14 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7087</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Misdemeanor DUI – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 7248) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-131438): Mr. W. was involved in a traffic accident in which several people were injured. One of the people required [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Misdemeanor DUI – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 7248) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-131438): Mr. W. was involved in a traffic accident in which several people were injured.  One of the people  required staples to be put into his head. Mr. W. had a .19 blood alcohol reading, along with cocaine, marijuana and narcotics in this system.  Because of the injuries to the victim, he was facing a potential 5 to 15 years in prison.  He was also facing a potential felony DUI because his license was suspended.  We were able to exploit various weaknesses of the case and get it plead to a misdemeanor DUI with 1 day in jail. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-dui-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-w/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Hit and Run, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7194)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-7194</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-7194#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:16:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[11 Hit and Run Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7085</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED &#8211; 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 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED &#8211; 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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-hit-and-run-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-7194/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FIRST DEGREE MURDER (2 Counts) REDUCED to Second Degree Murder &#8211; State v. Mr. B.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/first-degree-murder-2-counts-reduced-to-second-degree-murder-state-v-mr-b</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/first-degree-murder-2-counts-reduced-to-second-degree-murder-state-v-mr-b#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:16:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[64 Homicide Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7083</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FIRST DEGREE MURDER (2 Counts) REDUCED to Second Degree Murder &#8211; State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7131) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2005-141941): Mr. B. and 2 others went to the home of a methamphetamine dealer and his girlfriend [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FIRST DEGREE MURDER (2 Counts) REDUCED to Second Degree Murder &#8211; State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7131) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2005-141941): Mr. B. and 2 others went to the home of a methamphetamine dealer and his girlfriend under the rouse of borrowing some items.  Once they were there, they robbed the 2 victims at gunpoint and shot them.  Although Mr. B. was initially facing the Death Penalty, we were able to convince the State to not seek death. We were also able to raise some defenses in the case which resulted in securing a plea to 2 Counts of Second Degree Murder with a sentence of 13 years on each count.  Although Mr. B. admitted to being the shooter and firing 12 rounds of ammunition, there were still some significant questions as to the reliability of his confession.  Even without death being on the table, most people convicted in Arizona of a double homicide are given a minimum of a natural life sentence. , whereas Mr. B. will be free at age 44.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/first-degree-murder-2-counts-reduced-to-second-degree-murder-state-v-mr-b/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RESOLVED with Time Served &amp; Termination – Probation Violation, State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/resolved-with-time-served-termination-%e2%80%93-probation-violation-state-v-mr-s</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/resolved-with-time-served-termination-%e2%80%93-probation-violation-state-v-mr-s#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:15:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7081</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RESOLVED with Time Served &#038; Termination – Probation Violation, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7190) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2005-005758): Mr. S. had been on probation for a class 6 Felony Endangerment. He had not been appearing and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RESOLVED with Time Served &#038; Termination – Probation Violation, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7190) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2005-005758): Mr. S. had been on probation for a class 6 Felony Endangerment.  He had not been appearing and the State wished to revoke his probation.  We were able to secure an agreement to revoke his probation in exchange for an additional 54 days in jail and termination of probation.  He was originally facing a potential of 2.25 years in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/resolved-with-time-served-termination-%e2%80%93-probation-violation-state-v-mr-s/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to 90 Days Jail – Probation Violation, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 7186)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/reduced-to-90-days-jail-%e2%80%93-probation-violation-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-7186</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/reduced-to-90-days-jail-%e2%80%93-probation-violation-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-7186#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:15:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to 90 Days Jail – Probation Violation, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 7186) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2003-038760): Mr. G. was on probation for Resisting Arrest and was accused of violating by failing to report on 2 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to 90 Days Jail – Probation Violation, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 7186) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2003-038760): Mr. G. was on probation for Resisting Arrest and was accused of violating by failing to report on 2 different occasions, failing to pay his monthly service charge, and failing to complete his community service hours.  Although he was initially facing up to 2.25 years in prison, we were able to convince the judge to give him a 90 day jail sentence and reinstate him on probation.  The judge pointed out to Mr. G. how lucky he was, as this was not his first violation of probation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/reduced-to-90-days-jail-%e2%80%93-probation-violation-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-7186/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED – 3rd Offense Felony Aggravated DUI, State v. Mr. F. (DMC No. 7196)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-%e2%80%93-3rd-offense-felony-aggravated-dui-state-v-mr-f-dmc-no-7196</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-%e2%80%93-3rd-offense-felony-aggravated-dui-state-v-mr-f-dmc-no-7196#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[9 Felony Aggravated DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7077</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED – 3rd Offense Felony Aggravated DUI, State v. Mr. F. (DMC No. 7196) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2006-174415): Mr. F. had 2 prior felony DUI’s in which he had gone to prison. He had now had a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED – 3rd Offense Felony Aggravated DUI, State v. Mr. F. (DMC No. 7196) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2006-174415):  Mr. F. had 2 prior felony DUI’s in which he had gone to prison.  He had now had a 3rd felony DUI and was facing 6 to 15 years in prison (with 10 years being the presumptive sentence).  Initially, Mr. F. was utilizing a Public Defender and had been given a so called “final offer” of 4.5 years in prison.  We were able to take over the case and file Motions regarding No Reasonable Suspicion to Stop and No Probable Cause for Arrest.  Ultimately, the prosecutor agreed to withdraw the allegations of the 2 prior felony DUI’s and offered a 1st offense DUI with a mitigated sentence of 1.5 years in prison.  Mr. F. ended up actually serving only 12 months in custody.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-%e2%80%93-3rd-offense-felony-aggravated-dui-state-v-mr-f-dmc-no-7196/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Solicitation of Burglary, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No.7244)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-solicitation-of-burglary-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7244</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-solicitation-of-burglary-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7244#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:11:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[94 Burglary Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Solicitation of Burglary, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No.7244) (University Lakes Justice Court No. JC2007-115374): Mr. C. was an ASU student. While returning from class with a friend they sighted a golf course cart on ASU’s campus. Mr. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Solicitation of Burglary, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No.7244) (University Lakes Justice Court No. JC2007-115374):  Mr. C. was an ASU student.  While returning from class with a friend they sighted a golf course cart on ASU’s campus.  Mr. C. acted as a lookout while his friend stole various items from the golf cart.  We were able to explain to the prosecutor that a conviction would keep Mr. C. from ever obtaining a job in the Federal Government.  In addition, this would potentially have caused him  to be thrown out of his dorm room by the University.  Ultimately, were able to convince the State to dismiss charges “in the interests of justice.”  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-solicitation-of-burglary-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7244/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Burglary, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.7307)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-burglary-state-v-mr-m-dmc-no-7307</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-burglary-state-v-mr-m-dmc-no-7307#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:11:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[94 Burglary Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7073</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Burglary, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.7307) (United States District Court No. CR06-507-PHX-NVW): Mr. M. worked at a pawn shop where he was accused of stealing $150,000 in jewelry and electronics. During the course of the investigation he [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Burglary, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.7307) (United States District Court No. CR06-507-PHX-NVW): Mr. M. worked at a pawn shop where he was accused of stealing $150,000 in jewelry and electronics.  During the course of the investigation he admitted to taking one firearm while he worked there, but denied the other thefts.  He was able to pass a polygraph test, and we were able to show that the Government lacked any evidence of the items alleged to be stolen.  Ultimately he was allowed to do Diversion in exchange for a dismissal of the Theft of Gun charge which had been brought against him.  In the end, all charges were dismissed and he had no convictions on his record.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-burglary-state-v-mr-m-dmc-no-7307/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Misdemeanor Endangerment – Child Abuse, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7257)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-endangerment-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7257</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-endangerment-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7257#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:10:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[67 Child/Vulnerable Adult Abused Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7071</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Misdemeanor Endangerment – Child Abuse, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7257) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2007-005374): Mr. B. had gone through a divorce with his ex-wife and had custody of his 6 year old daughter. He [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Misdemeanor Endangerment – Child Abuse, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7257) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2007-005374): Mr. B. had gone through a divorce with his ex-wife and had custody of his 6 year old daughter.  He had gone to work and left his 6 year old at home because the babysitter had canceled.  When his ex-wife found out, she contacted police.  When police came to the house, they discovered the house in a state of disarray, and they felt Mr. B. had been neglecting/abusing his daughter.  After hiring us, we were able to show that the most he should be charged with was an Endangerment.  Ultimately the prosecutor agreed and the case was plead down to a Class 6 Undesignated Endangerment, which turned into a Misdemeanor after Mr. B. successfully completed one year of probation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-endangerment-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7257/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Probation – Child Pornography, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7155)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-pornography-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7155</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-pornography-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7155#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:10:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[25 Child Pornography Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[300 Sex Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7069</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Probation – Child Pornography, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7155) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. JV-544956): Mr. H. was a 17 year old male who was utilizing a file sharing software “Limewire.” While downloading music and videos, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Probation – Child Pornography, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7155) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. JV-544956): Mr. H. was a 17 year old male who was utilizing a file sharing software “Limewire.”  While downloading music and videos, he came across what appeared to be child pornography.  Due to his youth and inexperience, he downloaded these images.  He thought they were “gross” and would use them to “freak out” his friends.  The FBI traced the images to his computer and executed a search warrant.  His mother brought him down for questioning and let him speak to police.  This resulted with him being charged with Child Pornography.  We were able to keep the case in the juvenile system, as opposed to being transferred to the adult system where Mr. H. would have faced 10 years in prison, per video.  Ultimately, the case was resolved with probation until his 18th birthday, 60 days of deferred jail, and various counseling.  When he successfully completed his counseling and probation, the jail was deleted and he did not have to register as a sex offender.  He now has nothing showing on his adult record.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-pornography-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7155/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. Y. (DMC No. 7171)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-y-dmc-no-7171</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-y-dmc-no-7171#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:09:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1200 Dismissed at Trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jury Trial Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7067</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. Y. (DMC No. 7171) (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2006-065603): Mr. Y. had been in an argument with his wife when he kicked open the bedroom door. Police were called and he stated the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. Y. (DMC No. 7171) (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2006-065603): Mr. Y. had been in an argument with his wife when he kicked open the bedroom door.  Police were called and he stated the damage had occurred 2 days prior.  At the time of trial, the State was lacking critical evidence and were unable to proceed.  All charges were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-y-dmc-no-7171/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Ms. W. (DMC No. 7137)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-ms-w-dmc-no-7137</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-ms-w-dmc-no-7137#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:08:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7065</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Ms. W. (DMC No. 7137) (South Mountain Justice Court No. JC2006-166521): Ms. W. had returned home to discover that her husband was engaged in an extramarital affair. She became enraged and smashed a window [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Ms. W. (DMC No. 7137) (South Mountain Justice Court No. JC2006-166521): Ms. W. had returned home to discover that her husband was engaged in an extramarital affair. She became enraged and smashed a window and his cell phone.  She was cited with Domestic Violence/Criminal Damage, and was facing possible jail time.  We arranged to have her pay $830 items for the damaged items, and the State agreed to dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-ms-w-dmc-no-7137/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7195)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-d-dmc-no-7195</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-d-dmc-no-7195#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:08:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7195) (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2006-0055734): Mr. D. had been drinking with friends when he came across a hole that City workers had dug in order to repair a pipe. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 7195) (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2006-0055734): Mr. D. had been drinking with friends when he came across a hole that City workers had dug in order to repair a pipe.  He was then seen taking a brick and smashing the pipe, causing a water leak. Police were called and he was charged with Criminal Damage.  The witness was a two-time convicted felon living at a halfway house across the street.  We were able to convince the prosecutors that they had an identification problem, and that a Diversion program allowing Mr. D. to earn a dismissal would be more appropriate.  Ultimately, all charges were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-d-dmc-no-7195/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7293)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7293</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7293#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:08:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7061</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7293) (Surprise Municipal Court No. CR07-00271): Mr. B. was in the process of going through a divorce with his wife when she returned to find him sitting in the living [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7293) (Surprise Municipal Court No. CR07-00271): Mr. B. was in the process of going through a divorce with his wife when she returned to find him sitting in the living room with a friend.  She noticed that several items were broken in the house and she yelled at him and his friend to leave.  She then went upstairs and heard more items breaking, and the police were then summoned to their house.  We were able to convince the prosecutor that Mr. B. deserved to have some type of Diversion classes in which charges would be dropped.  They agreed, and ultimately all charges were dropped.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7293/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No.7238)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7238</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7238#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:07:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7059</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No.7238) (Surprise Municipal Court No. CR07-00026): Mr. C. had come home from a fishing trip and had said hello to his neighbor. He had had previous police contacts at his house [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. C. (DMC No.7238) (Surprise Municipal Court No. CR07-00026): Mr. C. had come home from a fishing trip and had said hello to his neighbor.  He had had previous police contacts at his house before.  The neighbor would not acknowledge him, and Mr. C. became upset and began yelling, “Are you too good to say hi to me?”  The yelling continued and his neighbor then called the police.  Although Mr. C. was charged with Disorderly Conduct, we were able to show the prosecutor that this was not truly disorderly behavior and that his speech was protected by the First Amendment.  The prosecutor agreed and all charges were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-c-dmc-no-7238/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7301)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7301</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7301#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7057</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7301) (Surprise Municipal Court No. CR07-00386): Some neighbors had called regarding Mr. H. riding around on a recreational vehicle in a reckless manner up and down the neighborhood streets. When police [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7301) (Surprise Municipal Court No. CR07-00386): Some neighbors had called regarding Mr. H. riding around on a recreational vehicle in a reckless manner up and down the neighborhood streets.  When police arrived, they saw Mr. H. arguing with his neighbor.  Mr. H. then walked to the back yard and began punching a shed and then arcadia door with his bare fist.  His knuckles were bleeding and he appeared to be intoxicated.   He was subsequently arrested and charged with Disorderly Conduct.  We were able to convince the prosecutor that a person cannot be disorderly in their own backyard with their own property without other neighbor’s peace and quiet being disturbed.  The State agreed and all charges were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7301/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Possession of a Narcotic Drug, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No.7231)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-possession-of-a-narcotic-drug-state-v-mr-d-dmc-no-7231</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-possession-of-a-narcotic-drug-state-v-mr-d-dmc-no-7231#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:06:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[82 Drug Crimes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7055</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Possession of a Narcotic Drug, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No.7231) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2003-032967): Mr. D. had possessed a forged prescription and had obtained prescription drugs from a Walgreens. He subsequently [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Possession of a Narcotic Drug, State v. Mr. D. (DMC No.7231) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2003-032967): Mr. D. had possessed a forged prescription and had obtained prescription drugs from a Walgreens.  He subsequently was charged and fled the state, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.  Approximately 5 years later he was arrested and needed to deal with the charges.  We were able to convince the prosecutors that he was now a completely different man than he had been 5 years earlier, and they agreed to offer a plea to a misdemeanor of Solicitation of Narcotic Drugs.  He was able to go back to California without this affecting his job or his career.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-possession-of-a-narcotic-drug-state-v-mr-d-dmc-no-7231/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Probation – Sale of 5 Pounds of Marijuana, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7288)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-sale-of-5-pounds-of-marijuana-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7288</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-sale-of-5-pounds-of-marijuana-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7288#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:06:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[82 Drug Crimes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7053</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Probation – Sale of 5 Pounds of Marijuana, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7288) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2007-106013): Mr. B. was observed pulling up to an apartment complex and removing a duffle bag containing 5 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Probation – Sale of 5 Pounds of Marijuana, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7288) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2007-106013): Mr. B. was observed pulling up to an apartment complex and removing a duffle bag containing 5 pounds of marijuana from his car.  Police were conducting surveillance on this area based on a tip by an informant.  Mr. B. admitted that he was delivering the marijuana for a friend from California.  Because the weight was more than 2 pounds, Mr. B. was facing a potential of over a decade in prison.  Through pointing out various issues with the search and problems with the questioning in violation of Mr. B.’s rights, we were able to secure a deal for 2 years of probation with zero days in jail.  In addition, he was allowed to transfer his probation to California (where he lived). </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-sale-of-5-pounds-of-marijuana-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7288/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Illegal Sale of Prescription Drugs, State v. Mr. A. (DMC No.7256)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-illegal-sale-of-prescription-drugs-state-v-mr-a-dmc-no-7256</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-illegal-sale-of-prescription-drugs-state-v-mr-a-dmc-no-7256#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:05:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7051</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Illegal Sale of Prescription Drugs, State v. Mr. A. (DMC No.7256) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. JV 544825): Mr. A. was a 15 year old high school student who took Zanax to school to sell to other kids. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Illegal Sale of Prescription Drugs, State v. Mr. A. (DMC No.7256) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. JV 544825): Mr. A. was a 15 year old high school student who took Zanax to school to sell to other kids.  He was subsequently arrested and charged with Possession of Narcotic Drugs for Sale.  We were able to convince the prosecutors to keep the case in Juvenile Court, rather than routing it do adult court, where Mr. A. would have potentially faced years in prison.  We were able to show that because of his youth and immaturity, this case should be dismissed in its entirety.  In exchange for a 3 page essay to be given to the judge, we were able to have all charges dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-illegal-sale-of-prescription-drugs-state-v-mr-a-dmc-no-7256/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7313)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7313</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7313#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:04:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7048</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7313) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-119793): Mr. H. was seen driving erratically through a neighborhood and throwing an item from his window. When officers stopped him, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Misdemeanor – Felony Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7313) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-119793): Mr. H. was seen driving erratically through a neighborhood and throwing an item from his window.  When officers stopped him, they realized that Mr. H. was delivering newspapers with his son.  When an argument ensued, the officer stated that he was going to write Mr. H. a traffic ticket.  Mr. H. got out of his vehicle to discuss this with the officer, and he was subsequently thrown to the ground and charged with Aggravated Assault on a Police Officer.  We were able to show how outrageous the officer’s conduct was, and the State agreed to offer a Misdemeanor Disorderly Conduct charge.  Mr. H. took the plea in order to avoid the felony and to keep his employment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7313/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7177)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7177-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7177-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:03:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[51 Assault/Domestic Violence Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7046</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7177) (Tempe Municipal Court No. 07-976814): Mr. H. and his roommate were at a non-alcoholic fraternity event on ASU’s campus. When they returned to their dormroom, Mr. H.’s roommate struck him in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7177) (Tempe Municipal Court No. 07-976814): Mr. H. and his roommate were at a non-alcoholic fraternity event on ASU’s campus.  When they returned to their dormroom, Mr. H.’s roommate struck him in the back with a beanbag.  Mr. H. instinctively turned and punched his roommate in the face.  He was subsequently charged with Assault.  We were able to show the prosecutor that self-defense was proper.  The State agreed with us and dismissed all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7177-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Assault/Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7286)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assaultdisorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7286-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assaultdisorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7286-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:03:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[51 Assault/Domestic Violence Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Assault/Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7286) (Scottsdale Municipal Court No. CR-2006030863): Mr. H. lived in a house with several college roommates. He had been out drinking with his roommates when they arrived back at their house [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Assault/Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7286) (Scottsdale Municipal Court No. CR-2006030863): Mr. H. lived in a house with several college roommates.  He had been out drinking with his roommates when they arrived back at their house and encountered another roommate who had been drinking.  Mr. H. began wrestling and fighting with that roommate, and police were called.  Because Mr. H. was roommates with the gentleman he fought with, he was charged with a Domestic Violence Assault.  We were able to show that this simply an argument between roommates, and the alleged victim no longer sought to proceed with charges.  The case was then dismissed on the day of trial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assaultdisorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7286-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7177)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7177</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7177#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:35:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[51 Assault/Domestic Violence Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7177) (Tempe Municipal Court No. 07-976814): Mr. H. and his roommate were at a non-alcoholic fraternity event on ASU’s campus. When they returned to their dormroom, Mr. H.’s roommate struck him in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7177) (Tempe Municipal Court No. 07-976814): Mr. H. and his roommate were at a non-alcoholic fraternity event on ASU’s campus.  When they returned to their dormroom, Mr. H.’s roommate struck him in the back with a beanbag.  Mr. H. instinctively turned and punched his roommate in the face.  He was subsequently charged with Assault.  We were able to show the prosecutor that self-defense was proper.  The State agreed with us and dismissed all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7177/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Assault/Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7286)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assaultdisorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7286</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assaultdisorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7286#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:35:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[51 Assault/Domestic Violence Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7039</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Assault/Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7286) (Scottsdale Municipal Court No. CR-2006030863): Mr. H. lived in a house with several college roommates. He had been out drinking with his roommates when they arrived back at their house [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Assault/Disorderly Conduct, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7286) (Scottsdale Municipal Court No. CR-2006030863): Mr. H. lived in a house with several college roommates.  He had been out drinking with his roommates when they arrived back at their house and encountered another roommate who had been drinking.  Mr. H. began wrestling and fighting with that roommate, and police were called.  Because Mr. H. was roommates with the gentleman he fought with, he was charged with a Domestic Violence Assault.  We were able to show that this simply an argument between roommates, and the alleged victim no longer sought to proceed with charges.  The case was then dismissed on the day of trial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assaultdisorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7286/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Child Molestation &amp; Kidnapping, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7243)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-kidnapping-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7243</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-kidnapping-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7243#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[113 Sex Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[300 Sex Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7037</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Child Molestation &#038; Kidnapping, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7243) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2006-166803): Mr. B. was a teacher at a local elementary school and was accused by a student of fondling her breast [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Child Molestation &#038; Kidnapping, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No.7243) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2006-166803):  Mr. B. was a teacher at a local elementary school and was accused by a student of fondling her breast over her clothes. We had Mr. B. take a polygraph test, which he passed.  In addition, there were no other witnesses to corroborate these allegations.  The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office still insisted on proceeding to Grand Jury, however there was no indictment returned.  The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office then made a Motion to the Court to release the findings of the Grand Jury (which is necessary in order to discuss Grand Jury findings), and that Motion was granted.  Even though Mr. B. was not indicted, he was still forced to resign his position.  He was initially facing years in prison, but ended up with no charges being filed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-kidnapping-state-v-mr-b-dmc-no-7243/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Child Molestation, State v. Mr. W. (DMC No.7266)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-state-v-mr-w-dmc-no-7266</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-state-v-mr-w-dmc-no-7266#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[113 Sex Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[300 Sex Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7035</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Child Molestation, State v. Mr. W. (DMC No.7266) (Pinal County Sheriff’s Office): Mr. W. was a teacher for Special Education students in 6th, 7th, and 8th grade. He was accused of improperly touching a student, and was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Child Molestation, State v. Mr. W. (DMC No.7266) (Pinal County Sheriff’s Office): Mr. W. was a teacher for Special Education students in 6th, 7th, and 8th grade.  He was accused of improperly touching a student, and was put on Administrative Leave.  We were able to show that the actual incident involved a 12-year old student who kept falling asleep in class.  When Mr. W. went up to her and rubbed her back in order to wake her (with 30 other students in the room), she woke up and claimed that her bra strap had become undone. She then retracted some other allegations she had made against Mr. W. and no charges were brought against him.  In addition, he had no adverse record placed on his teaching license.  Lastly, he then transferred to teach at a local high school and was paid for all of the time he had been placed on Administrative Leave.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-state-v-mr-w-dmc-no-7266/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MANSLAUGHTER NOT CHARGED/REDUCED to Misdemeanor DUI – State v. Mr. T. (DMC No. 7216)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/manslaughter-not-chargedreduced-to-misdemeanor-dui-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-t-dmc-no-7216</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/manslaughter-not-chargedreduced-to-misdemeanor-dui-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-t-dmc-no-7216#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:33:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[64 Homicide Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[MANSLAUGHTER NOT CHARGED/REDUCED to Misdemeanor DUI – State v. Mr. T. (DMC No. 7216) (East Mesa Justice Court No. TR2006-172224): Mr. T. was traveling westbound on University Drive in Mesa when an individual attempted to cross University diagonal to the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MANSLAUGHTER NOT CHARGED/REDUCED to Misdemeanor DUI – State v. Mr. T. (DMC No. 7216) (East Mesa Justice Court No. TR2006-172224): Mr. T. was traveling westbound on University Drive in Mesa when an individual attempted to cross University diagonal to the flow of traffic.  He was unfortunately struck and killed.  Mr. T. was interviewed by police and he admitted to using marijuana in the prior 24 hrs.  We were able to convince the State that no individual would have been able to stop in time to avoid the collision.  In addition, we were able to show that the marijuana would not have affected his ability to drive.  Although we convinced the State to not file Manslaughter charges, they did file charges for DUI with a metabolite of marijuana in System.  The case was ultimately resolved as a Misdemeanor DUI with 1 day in jail – even though it started out with Mr. T. facing a potential 21 years in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/manslaughter-not-chargedreduced-to-misdemeanor-dui-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-t-dmc-no-7216/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Probation – Child Molestation, State v. Mr. S. (DMC #7292)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-state-v-mr-s-dmc-7292</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-state-v-mr-s-dmc-7292#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:32:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[23 Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct With Minor Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[300 Sex Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7031</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Probation – Child Molestation, State v. Mr. S. (DMC #7292) (Gila County Superior Court No. CR2007-0195): Mr. S. was 16 years old and was accused of trying to fondle an 11 year old and a 9 year old [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Probation – Child Molestation, State v. Mr. S. (DMC #7292) (Gila County Superior Court No. CR2007-0195): Mr. S. was 16 years old and was accused of trying to fondle an 11 year old and a 9 year old while on various field trips with a counseling group for disturbed teenagers.  Although Mr. S. was only 16, he was charged as an adult.  Because he was charged with 2 Counts of Child Molestation, he was facing a minimum of 20 years in prison.  We were able to show that he had a disturbed mental state, and had a high level of mitigation and family support.  We ultimately were able to reduce the initial plea from 10 years in prison to probation with 1 year in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-molestation-state-v-mr-s-dmc-7292/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Child Abuse, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No.7260)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-7260</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-7260#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[68 Child/Vulnerable Adult Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7028</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Child Abuse, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No.7260) (El Mirage Police Department): Mr. S. was a foster parent looking after many kids in his house. One of the residents was a 21 year old who was mildly [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Child Abuse, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No.7260) (El Mirage Police Department): Mr. S. was a foster parent looking after many kids in his house.  One of the residents was a 21 year old who was mildly retarded and a ward of the State.  The alleged victim called police and stated he had been punched by Mr. S.  We were able to show that he merely wanted to move out of Mr. S.’s house in order to live with his girlfriend, and that he had manufactured his story.  No charges were brought against Mr. S.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-mr-s-dmc-no-7260/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7209)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7209</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7209#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7026</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7209) (Pinal County Superior Court): Mr. H. was arguing with his wife, when she attempted to strike him twice in the crotch. He used his arm to defend himself and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Assault, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7209) (Pinal County Superior Court): Mr. H. was arguing with his wife, when she attempted to strike him twice in the crotch.  He used his arm to defend himself and his wife’s Aunt (who was on the phone with her) called the police when she heard the ruckus.  Mr. H. was arrested and released to the Pinal County Pre-Trial Services.  We were able to intercept the case with the Pinal County Attorney’s Office, and no charges were filed.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7209/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Trespass and Minor in Consumption, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.7139)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-trespass-and-minor-in-consumption-state-v-mr-m-dmc-no-7139</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-trespass-and-minor-in-consumption-state-v-mr-m-dmc-no-7139#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:28:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7024</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Trespass and Minor in Consumption, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.7139) (Yavapai County Superior Court No. 2006-0206995): Mr. M. had been drinking, and was at a friend’s house that he used to live at. When he left the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Trespass and Minor in Consumption, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.7139) (Yavapai County Superior Court No. 2006-0206995):  Mr. M. had been drinking, and was at a friend’s house that he used to live at.  When he left the house he became disoriented and began walking down the wrong street.  He walked into a similar house in which a woman was inside.  She pushed him out the door and called police.  We were able to explain to the prosecutor that this was an unintentional act.  The prosecutor agreed to decline prosecution for Minor in Consumption and Trespassing.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-trespass-and-minor-in-consumption-state-v-mr-m-dmc-no-7139/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Discharging a Firearm, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No.7184)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-discharging-a-firearm-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-7184</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-discharging-a-firearm-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-7184#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:28:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[118 Miscellaneous Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7022</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Discharging a Firearm, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No.7184): Mr. G. had been accused by his boss of displaying a weapon with a suppressor and firing it into the canal while at a construction job site. He [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Discharging a Firearm, State v. Mr. G. (DMC No.7184):  Mr. G. had been accused by his boss of displaying a weapon with a suppressor and firing it into the canal while at a construction job site.  He had been terminated from the job site after the police report was made.  We were able to show that his boss did not actually witness any of the allegations, and probably made up the accusations in order to have a reason to fire Mr. G. No charges were ever brought against him.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-discharging-a-firearm-state-v-mr-g-dmc-no-7184/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Order to Show Cause, State v. Ms. S. (DMC No.7189)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-order-to-show-cause-state-v-ms-s-dmc-no-7189</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-order-to-show-cause-state-v-ms-s-dmc-no-7189#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7020</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Order to Show Cause, State v. Ms. S. (DMC No.7189) (Tempe City Court No. 05-883167): Ms. S. had previously been convicted of a DUI and was ordered to attend and complete alcohol classes. She had paid for all [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Order to Show Cause, State v. Ms. S. (DMC No.7189) (Tempe City Court No. 05-883167):  Ms. S. had previously been convicted of a DUI and was ordered to attend and complete alcohol classes.  She had paid for all of her classes up front, and had completed 32 hours (more than half of the required classes) when she received an Order to Show Cause Summons from the City of Tempe.  We were able to go in front of the judge and show that she was making a good faith effort to complete her classes, and that she had tested negative for any alcohol or drugs recently.  The judge agreed, and did not give Ms. S. any jail and simply allowed her to finish her classes.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-order-to-show-cause-state-v-ms-s-dmc-no-7189/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Criminal Speeding, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7214)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-speeding-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7214</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-speeding-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7214#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:27:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7018</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Criminal Speeding, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7214) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR-2007008327): Mr. H. was seen driving by an officer doing 71 mph in a 40 mph zone. It was a Saturday morning and no other people [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Criminal Speeding, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7214) (Scottsdale City Court No. TR-2007008327):  Mr. H. was seen driving by an officer doing 71 mph in a 40 mph zone.  It was a Saturday morning and no other people were on the roadway.  Because Mr. H. could not afford to have a criminal conviction, it was very important to try to have the case reduced to a civil ticket.  We were able to negotiate for Traffic Survival School in exchange for a dismissal of the charge, thereby saving Mr. H.’s license.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-criminal-speeding-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7214/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Disorderly Conduct – Trespass &amp; Assault, State v. Mr. A. (DMC No.7218)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-%e2%80%93-trespass-assault-state-v-mr-a-dmc-no-7218</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-%e2%80%93-trespass-assault-state-v-mr-a-dmc-no-7218#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:27:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[52 Assault/Domestic Violence Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7016</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Disorderly Conduct – Trespass &#038; Assault, State v. Mr. A. (DMC No.7218) (Chandler Municipal Court No. 07-P-872720): Mr. A. had been consuming alcohol and had taken several Zanax when he got into an argument with his girlfriend. They [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Disorderly Conduct – Trespass &#038; Assault, State v. Mr. A. (DMC No.7218) (Chandler Municipal Court No. 07-P-872720):  Mr. A. had been consuming alcohol and had taken several Zanax when he got into an argument with his girlfriend.  They began to scuffle, and he held her down on the ground.  A neighbor (who was an off-duty police officer), came over and tackled him just as other police officers were arriving.  Although Mr. A. was charged with Assault, Trespass and Disorderly Conduct, we were able to get the more serious charges of Assault and Trespass dismissed pursuant to plea.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-%e2%80%93-trespass-assault-state-v-mr-a-dmc-no-7218/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Driving on a Suspended License, State v. Ms. A. (DMC No.7309)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-driving-on-a-suspended-license-state-v-ms-a-dmc-no-7309</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-driving-on-a-suspended-license-state-v-ms-a-dmc-no-7309#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1200 Dismissed at Trial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jury Trial Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7014</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Driving on a Suspended License, State v. Ms. A. (DMC No.7309) (San Tan Justice Court No. TR06-0651336): Ms. A. had prior driving tickets which resulted in the suspension of her license. Although she had a prior Driving on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Driving on a Suspended License, State v. Ms. A. (DMC No.7309) (San Tan Justice Court No. TR06-0651336):  Ms. A. had prior driving tickets which resulted in the suspension of her license.  Although she had a prior Driving on a Suspended License, she thought she had adequately taken care of her license issues.  When she was pulled over for a brake light violation, she was arrested and charged with Driving on a Suspended License.  We were able to show that the DMV had mailed Ms. A. a Notice of Suspension approximately 5 months after the actual driving suspension date began.  When it came time for a trial to the Judge, the State was unable to proceed and charges were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-driving-on-a-suspended-license-state-v-ms-a-dmc-no-7309/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED to Aggressive Driving – Reckless Driving, State v. Mr. H.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-aggressive-driving-%e2%80%93-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-h</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-aggressive-driving-%e2%80%93-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-h#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:25:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7012</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED to Aggressive Driving – Reckless Driving, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7311) (Phoenix Municipal Court No. 13669073): Mr. C. was charged with Reckless Driving, Speeding, Unsafe Lane Change and Tailgating. Although he was facing enough points to suspend his [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED to Aggressive Driving – Reckless Driving, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No.7311) (Phoenix Municipal Court No. 13669073): Mr. C. was charged with Reckless Driving, Speeding, Unsafe Lane Change and Tailgating.  Although he was facing enough points to suspend his license for more than 6 months, we were able to secure a plea to a simple Aggressive Driving ticket which involved no license suspension.  This was important because Mr. H. had prior convictions for Under Age Drinking and Driving and Driving on a Suspended License.  He also had a business in which he could not afford any license suspension.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-aggressive-driving-%e2%80%93-reckless-driving-state-v-mr-h/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Felony Resisting Arrest/Extreme  DUI Reduced, State v. Mr. V. (DMC No. 7133)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-resisting-arrestextreme-dui-reduced-state-v-mr-v-dmc-no-7133</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-resisting-arrestextreme-dui-reduced-state-v-mr-v-dmc-no-7133#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:23:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[6 Extreme DUI’s Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[73 Resisting Arrest Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7009</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Felony Resisting Arrest/Extreme DUI Reduced, State v. Mr. V. (DMC No. 7133) (Pinal County Superior Court No. CR2007-00171): Mr. V. was pulled over for erratic driving and was being arrested for a subsequent DUI violation when the officer [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Felony Resisting Arrest/Extreme  DUI Reduced, State v. Mr. V. (DMC No. 7133) (Pinal County Superior Court No. CR2007-00171): Mr. V. was pulled over for erratic driving and was being arrested for a subsequent DUI violation when the officer claims he resisted arrest.  The officer slammed Mr. V. to the ground and injured Mr. V.’s head.  Mr. V. subsequently submitted to a blood test which revealed a .286 blood.  We were able to show that the use of force was excessive, and the State agreed to dismiss the felony Resisting Arrest charge, and agree to reduce the Extreme DUI to a first offense regular DUI with 1 day in jail (opposed to the 45 days now given for Super Extreme DUI’s).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-resisting-arrestextreme-dui-reduced-state-v-mr-v-dmc-no-7133/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Injunction Against Harassment, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7148)</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-injunction-against-harassment-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7148</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-injunction-against-harassment-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7148#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:22:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[75 Orders of Protection/Harassment Injunction Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=7007</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Injunction Against Harassment, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7148) (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2007004030): Mr. H. had been accused by his granddaughter of various crimes. She took out an Order of Protection/Injunction Against Harassment against him. He [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Injunction Against Harassment, State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 7148) (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2007004030): Mr. H. had been accused by his granddaughter of various crimes.  She took out an Order of Protection/Injunction Against Harassment against him.  He was accused of violating that Order by calling and leaving a message stating, “Hi, this is Gramps, give me a call.”  We were able to show that there was no accurate time on the answering machine recording which would indicate whether it had occurred before or after the Injunction was served.  On the date of trial, all charges were dismissed. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-injunction-against-harassment-state-v-mr-h-dmc-no-7148/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FELONY AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 4 REDUCED to Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor- State v. Mr. S. (Pinal County Superior Court CR2009-00829:</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/felony-aggravated-assault-4-reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-misdemeanor-state-v-mr-s-pinal-county-superior-court-cr2009-00829</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/felony-aggravated-assault-4-reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-misdemeanor-state-v-mr-s-pinal-county-superior-court-cr2009-00829#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 23:14:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6335</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AGGRAVATED ASSAULT FELONY 4 REDUCED to Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor- State v. Mr. S. (Pinal County Superior Court CR2009-00829: Mr. S. was seen by multiple witnesses punch another person while at a local bar in Florence, Arizona. The victim was flown [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AGGRAVATED ASSAULT FELONY 4 REDUCED to Disorderly Conduct Misdemeanor- State v. Mr. S. (Pinal County Superior Court CR2009-00829:<br />
Mr. S. was seen by multiple witnesses punch another person while at a local bar in Florence, Arizona.  The victim was flown via emergency helicopter to Scottsdale Osborn Hospital where he was treated for his injuries.  Mr. S., who had left the bar before the police arrived, was later contacted by police however was not immediately arrested.  After completing their investigation, Mr. S. was charged with Aggravated Assault, a Class 4 Felony, based on the severity of the injuries.  During interviews of multiple witnesses it was discovered that the victim had previously tried to start a fight with Mr. S. weeks prior and this altercation may have been a continuation of that previous contact.  After dismantling the State’s case, the prosecution offered, and Mr. S. accepted, a plea agreement to one misdemeanor count of Disorderly Conduct.  Mr. S. was sentenced and ultimately placed on just one year of unsupervised probation. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/felony-aggravated-assault-4-reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-misdemeanor-state-v-mr-s-pinal-county-superior-court-cr2009-00829/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>VEHICULAR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. N.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/vehicular-aggravated-assault-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-n</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/vehicular-aggravated-assault-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-n#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:31:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6318</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[VEHICULAR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. N. (DMC No. 504) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 9408459): Mr. N. was involved in a DUI accident in which the victim suffered several broken bones. On the day of trial [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>VEHICULAR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. N. (DMC No. 504) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 9408459):  Mr. N. was involved in a DUI accident in which the victim suffered several broken bones.  On the day of trial with Court-appointed counsel, he was talked into taking a plea agreement to 5 years in prison.  After his conviction, his wife hired us to look into the evidence.  We discovered there was a very strong Motion to Suppress his blood alcohol concentration, which was not argued by trial counsel.  After we filed our Post-Conviction Relief Petition, a hearing was held in which his court-appointed counsel admitted he did not understand the law.  The conviction was reversed and the State then extended an offer to a plea with time served.  Mr. N. did not have to return to prison, and wound up serving only a little over 1 year in custody.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/vehicular-aggravated-assault-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-n/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ARMED ROBBERY CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/armed-robbery-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-s</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/armed-robbery-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-s#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:31:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ARMED ROBBERY CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 1157) (Pima County Superior Court No. CR0143582): Mr. S. has been involved in drugs and various other unhealthy activities which led him and his girlfriend to be arrested and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ARMED ROBBERY CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 1157) (Pima County Superior Court No. CR0143582):  Mr. S. has been involved in drugs and various other unhealthy activities which led him and his girlfriend to be arrested and convicted for robbing a convenience store.  Because of Mr. S.’s prior criminal convictions, he was sentenced to 35 years to life in prison.  Although he had already spent 17 years in prison when we received the case, we were able to show that his trial counsel had a conflict of interest when representing both Mr. Smith and his girlfriend.  The Court agreed, and his conviction was reversed.  The State chose not to re-try Mr. S., and he did not return to prison (saving him from another 18 years to life in prison).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/armed-robbery-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-s/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEXUAL MISCONDUCTED WITH A MINOR CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. C.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/sexual-misconducted-with-a-minor-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-c</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/sexual-misconducted-with-a-minor-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-c#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SEXUAL MISCONDUCTED WITH A MINOR CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9441) (Pima County Superior Court No. CR2007-2716): Mr. C. had been accused of molesting his step-granddaughter (who was adopted). He used a Court-appointed attorney and was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SEXUAL MISCONDUCTED WITH A MINOR CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9441) (Pima County Superior Court No. CR2007-2716):  Mr. C. had been accused of molesting his step-granddaughter (who was adopted).  He used a Court-appointed attorney and was convicted and sentenced to 13 years in prison.  We were able to show that the prosecutor had improperly struck jurors who were similar to Mr. C. (i.e., older white males), in violation of Batson v. Kentucky, and the Court of Appeals reversed his conviction.  When the case came back, we were able to point the multitude of flaws in the State’s evidence, and the prosecution decided not to re-try Mr. C.  Although he had spent 20 months in jail, this was far short of the 13 year conviction he had previously received.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/sexual-misconducted-with-a-minor-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-c/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SECOND DEGREE MURDER CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Ms. G.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/second-degree-murder-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-g</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/second-degree-murder-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-g#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:30:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6312</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(DMC No. 9275) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2006-04688): Ms. G. had previously been convicted of Second Degree Murder after she shot her nephew twice in the head. At the time of the incident she was almost 60 years old [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(DMC No. 9275) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2006-04688):  Ms. G. had previously been convicted of Second Degree Murder after she shot her nephew twice in the head.  At the time of the incident she was almost 60 years old and her nephew was in his early 20’s.  He was very abusive to her, and was attacking her when she utilized her gun for self-defense.  Unfortunately, Ms. G. used a Court-appointed attorney and was convicted and sentenced to 12 years in prison.  Through searching the trial record we were able to show that her attorney was ineffective and did not present the proper jury instructions.  After we filed our Post-Conviction Relief Petition, the judge agreed and reversed her conviction.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/second-degree-murder-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-g/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-s</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-s#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:28:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6307</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Tempe City Court No. 06-887547): Mr. S. had a DUI conviction when he was in college. He had since graduated college with a Bachelor’s degree, and was currently applying to be a PGA professional so he could go out on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Tempe City Court No. 06-887547):  Mr. S. had a DUI conviction when he was in college.  He had since graduated college with a  Bachelor’s degree, and was currently applying to be a PGA professional so he could go out on tour playing golf.  We were able to show the judge that he had changed his life, and needed to have his conviction of guilt set aside.  The judge agreed and set aside all penalties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-s/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISORDERLY CONDUCT, POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA, AND MINOR IN CONSUMPTION CONVICTIONS EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. H.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/disorderly-conduct-possession-of-drug-paraphernalia-and-minor-in-consumption-convictions-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-h</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/disorderly-conduct-possession-of-drug-paraphernalia-and-minor-in-consumption-convictions-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-h#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 20:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6305</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Flagstaff City Court No. 98000505, 97004806 &#38; 9700375): Mr. H. had numerous problems with the law before he was 21 years of age. He was now 30 years old and wished to have his record cleaned up because he was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Flagstaff City Court No. 98000505, 97004806 &amp; 9700375):  Mr. H. had numerous problems with the law before he was 21 years of age.  He was now 30 years old and wished to have his record cleaned up because he was getting his Masters degree in education and was currently a High School teacher.  We were able to convince the judge to set aside all of his convictions, thereby allowing him to achieve a higher position with more pay in the teaching industry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/disorderly-conduct-possession-of-drug-paraphernalia-and-minor-in-consumption-convictions-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-h/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AGGRAVATED DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. E.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/aggravated-dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-e</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/aggravated-dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-e#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 18:43:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6303</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AGGRAVATED DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. E. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002-017672): Mr. E. had been convicted of Aggravated DUI approximately 4 years prior, and he had served his 4 months in prison and satisfied all of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AGGRAVATED DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. E. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002-017672):  Mr. E. had been convicted of Aggravated DUI approximately 4 years prior, and he had served his 4 months in prison and satisfied all of the probation and court requirements.  He needed his judgment of guilt set aside in order to restore his civil rights, his right to vote, and his right to possess a firearm, thereby allowing him to more successfully seek employment.  We were able to show the court that Mr. E. was immature at the time of his DUI convictions, and that he had successfully completed alcohol counseling and no longer consumed alcohol.  The judge agreed with us and set aside his judgment of guilty and restored his civil rights.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/aggravated-dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-e/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI CONVICITION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. F.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dui-convicition-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-f</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dui-convicition-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-f#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 18:41:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Scottsdale City Court No. 2006-017984CR): Mr. F. had been convicted of a DUI one year prior in the City of Scottsdale. He was a practicing physician with over 21 years experience. In order to keep his position on various medical [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Scottsdale City Court No. 2006-017984CR):  Mr. F. had been convicted of a DUI one year prior in the City of Scottsdale.  He was a practicing physician with over 21 years experience.  In order to keep his position on various medical association boards and continue interacting with the State Legislative Affairs Committee on medical issues, it was necessary to have his conviction set aside.  Once we proved to the judge that Mr. F.’s DUI arrest was a one-time issue, the judge set aside the judgment of guilt regarding Mr. F.’s DUI conviction.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/dui-convicition-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-f/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:53:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6092</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7086): A search warrant was served on a house that Mr. B. shared with several individuals. In that house they found [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 7086):  A search warrant was served on a house that Mr. B. shared with several individuals.  In that house they found 8 bales of marijuana, 18 grams of methamphetamine, $37,000 in cash, and numerous guns. We were able to convince the police and prosecutors that although he was present at the house during the search, he was unaware of any of these items inside the house.  All other residents were indicted for crimes except for Mr. B.  He was facing potential years in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Ms. K.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/disorderly-conduct-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-k</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/disorderly-conduct-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-k#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:51:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1500 Expungement Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6089</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Ms. K. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2006-006624): Ms. K. had previously been convicted in the Mesa Municipal Court for an alleged Disorderly Conduct/Domestic Violence. After we obtained the case and went through [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISORDERLY CONDUCT CONVICTION REVERSED – State v. Ms. K. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2006-006624):  Ms. K. had previously been convicted in the Mesa Municipal Court for an alleged Disorderly Conduct/Domestic Violence.  After we obtained the case and went through the trial record, we were able to show that the prosecutor inappropriately changed the theory of the case in the middle of trial and improperly amended the charges.  The judge erroneously allowed the prosecutor to do this.  We were able to show the Superior Court Appellate judge that this was improper, and that judge ruled in our favor and dismissed all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/expungement-victories/disorderly-conduct-conviction-reversed-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-k/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. H.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/aggravated-assault-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-h</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/aggravated-assault-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-h#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:50:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6086</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. H. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2001-090140): Approximately six years earlier, Mr. H. was suffering from a bi-polar disorder. Police were called to a disturbance, in which he engaged in a physical [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. H. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2001-090140):  Approximately six years earlier, Mr. H. was suffering from a bi-polar disorder.  Police were called to a disturbance, in which he engaged in a physical altercation and was convicted of Aggravated Assault on a Minor.  Mr. H. had now moved out of state and was under treatment and currently seeking employment.  This conviction would have cost him any job opportunities.  We were able to convince the Court to grant the motion to set aside his judgment of guilt, restore his right to posses firearms, and his right to vote.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/aggravated-assault-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-h/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. T.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-t</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-t#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:50:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6083</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. T. (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2004059564): Mr. T. had been convicted of a DUI approximately two years earlier. Mr. T. was now a Senior Graphic Designer at his business, and he needed the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DUI CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Mr. T. (Mesa Municipal Court No. 2004059564):  Mr. T. had been convicted of a DUI approximately two years earlier.  Mr. T. was now a Senior Graphic Designer at his business, and he needed the conviction to be expunged in order to continue being promoted at work.  We were able to show the judge that he had turned his life around and had gone through counseling.  The judge then set aside Mr. T.’s judgment of guilt for DUI.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/dui-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-t/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ESCAPE CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. M.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/escape-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-m</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/escape-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-m#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:50:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1400 Appeal/Post Conviction Relief Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6080</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ESCAPE CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. M. (McDowell Mountain Justice Court No. CR0102060): Ms. M. had been convicted five years earlier for a misdemeanor escape charge. We were able to demonstrate that this happened when she was very young [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ESCAPE CONVICTION EXPUNGED – State v. Ms. M. (McDowell Mountain Justice Court No. CR0102060):  Ms. M. had been convicted five years earlier for a misdemeanor escape charge.  We were able to demonstrate that this happened when she was very young and at a stage in her life when she was immature.  She now worked as an account executive in a bank, and needed this judgment of guilt to be set aside so she could proceed with her life.  The judge agreed, and set aside her conviction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/appeal-post-conviction-relief-victories/escape-conviction-expunged-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-m/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Minor in Possession/Consumption of Alcohol</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-minor-in-possessionconsumption-of-alcohol</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-minor-in-possessionconsumption-of-alcohol#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:49:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[118 Miscellaneous Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6078</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Minor in Possession/Consumption of Alcohol, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7064) (City of Tempe): Mr. S. was in a vehicle with his friends on Mill Avenue with an open container in his hand when a bicycle [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Minor in Possession/Consumption of Alcohol, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7064) (City of Tempe):  Mr. S. was in a vehicle with his friends on Mill Avenue with an open container in his hand when a bicycle cop rode up.  He told the driver of the vehicle to pull over, and then he questioned the occupants about their ages.  We were able to show that there was no reasonable suspicion to stop, and the decision was made not to file charges by the Tempe City Prosecutor’s Office. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-minor-in-possessionconsumption-of-alcohol/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Concealed Weapon Violation, State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-concealed-weapon-violation-state-v-mr-s</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-concealed-weapon-violation-state-v-mr-s#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:49:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[102 Misconduct Involving a Weapon Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[118 Miscellaneous Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Concealed Weapon Violation, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 6979): Mr. S. was a motorcycle rider who was stopped near Flagstaff, Arizona. The police felt that he was wearing a jacket that would be indicative of belonging [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Concealed Weapon Violation, State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 6979):  Mr. S. was a motorcycle rider who was stopped near Flagstaff, Arizona.  The police felt that he was wearing a jacket that would be indicative of belonging to a motorcycle gang.  Upon a search, a concealed weapon was discovered on Mr. S.’s property.  We were able to argue that this concealed weapon (brass knuckles) was actually a belt buckle.  We also argued that there was no reasonable suspicion to stop Mr. S. in the first place.  Ultimately, we convinced the prosecutor not to bring charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-concealed-weapon-violation-state-v-mr-s/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. K.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-k</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-k#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:48:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[117 Property Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[92 Criminal Damage Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6072</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 7083) (Gilbert Police Department): Mr. K. was a carpet salesman who was denied a sale and treated badly by some potential clients. He was accused of becoming upset and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 7083) (Gilbert Police Department):  Mr. K. was a carpet salesman who was denied a sale and treated badly by some potential clients.  He was accused of becoming upset and “keying” their car.  He was also accused of putting paint remover on somebody’s car.  We were able to show that Mr. K. was going through some emotional issues as he had recently given up a good job as a pilot to pursue an internet business selling carpet.  We were able to make restitution to all victims involved, and it was agreed that no charges would be filed against Mr. K. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-k/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR – Felony Criminal Damage</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:45:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[91 Criminal Damage Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6070</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR – Felony Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. D. (Maricopa County Juvenile Court): Mr. D. was charged with felony criminal damage and felony disorderly conduct arising from a family altercation. Mr. D. came in past his curfew, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR – Felony Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. D. (Maricopa County Juvenile Court):  Mr. D. was charged with felony criminal damage and felony disorderly conduct arising from a family altercation.  Mr. D. came in past his curfew, and his mother’s boyfriend (who had been drinking) got into an argument with Mr. D.  Mr. D. then locked himself in a room and the mother’s boyfriend pried the door open and poured soda over his head and body.  Mr. D. then became very upset, damaged the walls, pool table, and the windshield of his mother’s car.  We were able to convince the prosecutor he was operating under self-defense and duress, in addition to being provoked.  They agreed, and reduced his charges to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct with no days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED AT TRIAL – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/drug-crimes/dismissed-at-trial-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-drug-paraphernalia</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/drug-crimes/dismissed-at-trial-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-drug-paraphernalia#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1300 Bench Trial Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6068</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED AT TRIAL – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Ms. H. (University Lakes Justice Court No. CR05-0550731): Ms. H. was a resident of an ASU dormitory when police responded to an anonymous tip of drug [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED AT TRIAL – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Ms. H. (University Lakes Justice Court No. CR05-0550731):  Ms. H. was a resident of an ASU dormitory when police responded to an anonymous tip of drug sales.  When they questioned Ms. H., she consented to a search of the room. Underneath the bed they found a bag containing various items with burnt marijuana residue, and a small amount of marijuana.  Our contention was that the amount of marijuana was not enough to use, and because multiple people used that room, they could not prove it belonged to Ms. H.  Just before trial was to begin, we made a Motion that the actual evidence needed to be produced at trial, and the State did not have the evidence in their possession.  Therefore, the State filed a motion to dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/drug-crimes/dismissed-at-trial-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-and-possession-of-drug-paraphernalia/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PETTY OFFENSE &#8211; Possession of Marijuana in a Federal Facility</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-petty-offense-possession-of-marijuana-in-a-federal-facility</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-petty-offense-possession-of-marijuana-in-a-federal-facility#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:44:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[82 Drug Crimes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6066</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED TO PETTY OFFENSE &#8211; Possession of Marijuana in a Federal Facility, State v. Mr. H. (Arizona Magistrate Federal Court No. H5085840): Mr. H. walked into a federal building with marijuana in his back pocket. He was subsequently searched and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED TO PETTY OFFENSE &#8211; Possession of Marijuana in a Federal Facility, State v. Mr. H. (Arizona Magistrate Federal Court No. H5085840): Mr. H. walked into a federal building with marijuana in his back pocket.  He was subsequently searched and the marijuana was discovered.  He also was cited for impeding a federal investigation, and it was determined that he had driven to the federal facility while under the influence of alcohol and marijuana.  Ultimately, his case was reduced to a mere $275 fine and a plea to a petty offense.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-petty-offense-possession-of-marijuana-in-a-federal-facility/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Possession of Marijuana &amp; Drug Paraphernalia</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-drug-paraphernalia</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-drug-paraphernalia#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:43:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6064</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Possession of Marijuana &#38; Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Mr. T. (20020018CR): Mr. T. was stopped for a minor traffic violation in the Town of Quartzsite. Subsequently, a search of his vehicle took place, which was illegal. We filed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Possession of Marijuana &amp; Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Mr. T. (20020018CR):  Mr. T. was stopped for a minor traffic violation in the Town of Quartzsite.  Subsequently, a search of his vehicle took place, which was illegal.  We filed various Motions and the State agreed to dismiss the charges in their entirety.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-drug-paraphernalia/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Possession of Cocaine for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:43:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[83 Drug Sales Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6061</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Possession of Cocaine for Sale, State v. R. (DMC No. 1501) (1997090066CR): Mr. R was on probation and his house was randomly searched by his probation officer, who found cocaine during the search. Mr. R. was facing a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Possession of Cocaine for Sale, State v. R. (DMC No. 1501) (1997090066CR): Mr. R was on probation and his house was randomly searched by his probation officer, who found cocaine during the search.  Mr. R. was facing a minimum of 10 years in prison if convicted.  We were able to demonstrate problems with the search by his probation officer and got the charges dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Possession &amp; Sale of Ecstasy</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-sale-of-ecstasy</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-sale-of-ecstasy#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:42:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[83 Drug Sales Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6057</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Possession &#38; Sale of Ecstasy, State v. Mr. M. &#38; State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.’s 2352/2355) (20001286CR): Mr. M. and Mr. M. stayed out of town while attending a “rave” concert. They were subsequently stopped and searched [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Possession &amp; Sale of Ecstasy, State v. Mr. M. &amp; State v. Mr. M. (DMC No.’s 2352/2355) (20001286CR):  Mr. M. and Mr. M. stayed out of town while attending a “rave” concert.  They were subsequently stopped and searched by police in order to see if they were selling ecstasy.  While this occurred, one of the officers made racial slurs and slapped Mr. M. in the face.  They were then both booked into jail.  We contacted the Internal Affairs Department of the Eloy Police Department and had the officers involved disciplined.  In addition, all charges were dismissed against Mr. M. and Mr. M.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-sale-of-ecstasy/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:42:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6055</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 3149) (A22820CR): Mr. M. was stopped for an alleged Reckless Driving. Subsequently his vehicle was searched and dangerous drugs were located. Due to the fact that that search [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs, State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 3149) (A22820CR): Mr. M. was stopped for an alleged Reckless Driving.  Subsequently his vehicle was searched and dangerous drugs were located.  Due to the fact that that search of his vehicle was questionable, we were able to get the County Attorney to agree to dismiss the drug charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Transportation of Marijuana for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-transportation-of-marijuana-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-transportation-of-marijuana-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:42:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[83 Drug Sales Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED &#8211; Transportation of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 3712) (2003032789CR): Mr. P. was accused of sending 8 pounds of marijuana through the U.S. Mail. We were able to demonstrate that the State would have a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED &#8211; Transportation of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 3712) (2003032789CR):  Mr. P. was accused of sending 8 pounds of marijuana through the U.S. Mail.  We were able to demonstrate that the State would have a very difficult time proving it was Mr. P. who actually mailed the marijuana.  In addition, there were no fingerprints or admissions tying him to this crime.  We were able to negotiate a deal which included taking some classes in exchange for a dismissal of all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-transportation-of-marijuana-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Transportation and Possession of Cocaine for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-transportation-and-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-transportation-and-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:41:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[84 Drug Sales Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6050</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Transportation and Possession of Cocaine for Sale, State v. Mr. F. (2002253CR): Mr. F. was stopped in Apache County with 11 kilograms (more than 27 pounds) of cocaine inside his vehicle. We were able to show [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Transportation and Possession of Cocaine for Sale, State v. Mr. F. (2002253CR):  Mr. F. was stopped in Apache County with 11 kilograms (more than 27 pounds) of cocaine inside his vehicle.  We were able to show that he had requested an attorney at the time of the stop and the police denied his right to counsel.  Because all his statements were being suppressed, we were able to get the State to offer a probation deal with no jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-transportation-and-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Possession of Marijuana</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:40:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6046</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Possession of Marijuana, State v. Mr. R. (010800383CR): Mr. R. was pulled over for speeding, and subsequently cited for Possession of Marijuana. Officers took his wallet and looked through it while they were questioning him and found a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Possession of Marijuana, State v. Mr. R. (010800383CR): Mr. R. was pulled over for speeding, and subsequently cited for Possession of Marijuana. Officers took his wallet and looked through it while they were questioning him and found a marijuana cigarette.  We were able to get the Pima County Attorney’s Office to dismiss all charges due to a warrantless search issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Conspiracy to Sell Dangerous Drugs</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-conspiracy-to-sell-dangerous-drugs</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-conspiracy-to-sell-dangerous-drugs#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:40:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[103 Other Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[83 Drug Sales Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Conspiracy to Sell Dangerous Drugs, State v. Mr. A. (A713869CR): Police stopped Mr. A. for a minor traffic violation and then searched his vehicle without permission. Over 200 pills of Ecstasy and cocaine were found in his vehicle. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Conspiracy to Sell Dangerous Drugs, State v. Mr. A. (A713869CR): Police stopped Mr. A. for a minor traffic violation and then searched his vehicle without permission.  Over 200 pills of Ecstasy and cocaine were found in his vehicle.  Due to the fact that the search was illegal, we were able to get the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to dismiss the charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-conspiracy-to-sell-dangerous-drugs/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs and Drug Manufacturing Equipment</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-and-drug-manufacturing-equipment</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-and-drug-manufacturing-equipment#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:39:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs and Drug Manufacturing Equipment, State v. Mr. W. (99025147CR): Mr. W. was pulled over by police for a minor traffic violation. They opened the trunk of his car without his permission and found drugs [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs and Drug Manufacturing Equipment, State v. Mr. W. (99025147CR): Mr. W. was pulled over by police for a minor traffic violation.  They opened the trunk of his car without his permission and found drugs and drug manufacturing equipment.  Although he initially had a $50,000 bond and the Pinal County Attorney’s Office was seeking prison time, we were able to file a Motion to Suppress all of the items seized, and they moved to dismiss all charges prior to the hearing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-and-drug-manufacturing-equipment/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Possession of Marijuana and Drug Paraphernalia</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-possession-of-marijuana-and-drug-paraphernalia</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-possession-of-marijuana-and-drug-paraphernalia#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:39:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[81 Drug Crime Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6039</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED &#8211; Possession of Marijuana and Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Mr. S. (9906212CR): Mr. S. was pulled over for a minor traffic violation, and officers claimed they could smell marijuana. They found a scale in the center console and then [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED &#8211; Possession of Marijuana and Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Mr. S. (9906212CR): Mr. S. was pulled over for a minor traffic violation, and officers claimed they could smell marijuana.  They found a scale in the center console and then they searched his backpack, finding over 1 pound of marijuana.  Because the search of the backpack was done without a warrant, we were able to file a Motion to Suppress all evidence, and the State moved to dismiss all charges against Mr. S.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-possession-of-marijuana-and-drug-paraphernalia/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Manufacturing and Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-manufacturing-and-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-manufacturing-and-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:39:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[83 Drug Sales Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6037</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED &#8211; Manufacturing and Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Mr. L. (2002001427CR): Mr. L. was stopped by police, and they discovered materials in his vehicle which could be used in the manufacture of methamphetamine. Police then obtained [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED &#8211; Manufacturing and Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Mr. L. (2002001427CR): Mr. L. was stopped by police, and they discovered materials in his vehicle which could be used in the manufacture of methamphetamine.  Police then obtained a search warrant (after the fact) and Mr. L. was charged with numerous drug charges.  We then filed a Motion to Suppress all Evidence based on a bad search, and the Maricopa County Attorney’ office subsequently dismissed all charges against Mr. L.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-manufacturing-and-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Possession of Marijuana for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[83 Drug Sales Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6034</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DISMISSED &#8211; Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Ms. N. (1999010346CR): Ms. N. lived in an apartment with her boyfriend and 2 other males. Her roommates were both involved in drug activity of which Ms. Nguyen had knowledge. However, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DISMISSED &#8211; Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Ms. N. (1999010346CR): Ms. N. lived in an apartment with her boyfriend and 2 other males.  Her roommates were both involved in drug activity of which Ms. Nguyen had knowledge.  However, she never participated in any of the sales or profits.  Although she was charged with a very serious felony and the original plea offer from the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office was prison time, we were able to show that 1 of her co-defendants was the true drug dealer, and all charges were dismissed against Ms. N.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Cocaine for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:37:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6032</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Cocaine for Sale, Federal U.S. District Court of Arizona v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 1084): Mr. R. was caught with several “8-balls” of cocaine. We met with Detectives in order to get a cooperation deal. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Cocaine for Sale, Federal U.S. District Court of Arizona v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 1084):  Mr. R. was caught with several “8-balls” of cocaine.  We met with Detectives in order to get a cooperation deal.  Mr. R. had made over 100 buys of “8-balls” of cocaine from California.  Due to his cooperation, no charges were filed and his arrest record was sealed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-cocaine-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale-3</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale-3#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:37:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6029</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Ms. B., Federal U.S. District Court of Arizona (DMC No. 1069): Ms. B. came to us having already secured a cooperation deal with Detectives. The Detectives claimed she wasn’t [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Ms. B., Federal U.S. District Court of Arizona (DMC No. 1069):  Ms. B. came to us having already secured a cooperation deal with Detectives.  The Detectives claimed she wasn’t living up to her end of the deal, and they were going to have the U.S. Attorney charge her.  We then negotiated with the Detectives and the U.S. Attorney’s Office and got an agreement that she had satisfied her contract and would not be charged.  No charges were filed and her arrest record was sealed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale-3/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Steroids for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-steroids-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-steroids-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:37:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6027</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Steroids for Sale, State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 1175): Mr. R. was pulled over for allegedly tailgating another vehicle. Undercover Drug Officers then asked if they could search his car and found numerous boxes [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Steroids for Sale, State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 1175):  Mr. R. was pulled over for allegedly tailgating another vehicle.  Undercover Drug Officers then asked if they could search his car and found numerous boxes and bottles of steroids.  We were able to make contact with the Detectives, and through a cooperation deal, they agreed not to file any charges against R.  In addition, his arrest record was sealed. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-steroids-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED &#8211; Possession of Cocaine</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-cocaine</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-cocaine#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:36:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6023</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED &#8211; Possession of Cocaine, State v. Mr. R. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 2078): Mr. R. was pulled over for a minor traffic violation and the officer asked to search his person. When he patted him down (looking for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED &#8211; Possession of Cocaine, State v. Mr. R. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 2078):  Mr. R. was pulled over for a minor traffic violation and the officer asked to search his person.  When he patted him down (looking for weapons), he found an envelope which contained cocaine.  Because the search exceeded the standard Terry search, we were able to suppress the cocaine and convinced the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office that no charges should be brought against Mr. R.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-cocaine/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED &#8211; Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6021</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED &#8211; Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Mr. K. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 2063): Mr. K. was arrested with 10,000 pills of Ecstasy and Ketamine. We were able to enter into a cooperation agreement with Detectives [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED &#8211; Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale,  State v. Mr. K. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 2063):   Mr. K. was arrested with 10,000 pills of Ecstasy and Ketamine.  We were able to enter into a cooperation agreement with Detectives and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, and as a result, no charges were filed against Mr. K.  in addition, his arrest record was sealed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Manufacturing Methamphetamine</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-manufacturing-methamphetamine</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-manufacturing-methamphetamine#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:35:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6018</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Manufacturing Methamphetamine, Federal U.S. District Court of Arizona v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 2195): Mr. S. was caught by the D.E.A. with an extremely large amount of currency and chemicals for making methamphetamine. Through our meetings with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Manufacturing Methamphetamine, Federal U.S. District Court of Arizona v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 2195): Mr. S. was caught by the D.E.A. with an extremely large amount of currency and chemicals for making methamphetamine.  Through our meetings with the D.E.A., we were able to cut a cooperation deal, and no charges were filed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.  In addition, all records of his arrest have been sealed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-manufacturing-methamphetamine/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:35:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6015</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Mr. F. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 2192): Mr. F. lived in a different state and was visiting a house that had numerous residents. He also ran part of his [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale, State v. Mr. F. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 2192):  Mr. F. lived in a different state and was visiting a house that had numerous residents.  He also ran part of his business out of this house.  A search was executed on the house, and numerous drugs were found.  Mr. F. had nothing to do with the drugs, and we had him take a drug test (all showing negative for drug use).  We then met with Detectives and showed them Mr. F.’s drug test results.  In addition, we requested that all items containing drugs be fingerprinted, as they would be negative for Mr. F.’s fingerprints.  We convinced the Detectives to not bring charges against Mr. F. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:34:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6013</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. Z. (Maricopa County) (DMC No 4033): Mr. Z. came to us after a search warrant was served on his residence. Mr. Z. had over a half pound of marijuana [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. Z. (Maricopa County) (DMC No 4033): Mr. Z. came to us after a search warrant was served on his residence.  Mr. Z. had over a half pound of marijuana at his residence, and it appeared that he had been selling smaller quantities from his house.  This exposed him to years of potential prison.  We were able to negotiate a “cooperation deal” with Chandler Detectives.  After Mr. Z. satisfied his agreement, no charges were ever brought against him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:32:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6011</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale/Misconduct with a Weapon/Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Mr. C. (Maricopa County) (DMC No.’s 4202/4203): Mr. C. came to us with 3 different cases. We were able to negotiate a “cooperation [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Dangerous Drugs for Sale/Misconduct with a Weapon/Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, State v. Mr. C. (Maricopa County) (DMC No.’s 4202/4203):  Mr. C. came to us with 3 different cases.  We were able to negotiate a “cooperation deal” with the DEA, and local detectives.  Mr. C. satisfied his obligations and no charges were brought against him.  He originally was facing years in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-dangerous-drugs-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Possession of Marijuana for Sale</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:31:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[116 Drug Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[600 Drug Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[85 Drug Crime Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6008</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. W. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 3890): Mr. W. was an ASU student who was arrested in his dorm room with 3 ounces of marijuana in various forms of packaging, and $1,200.00 in cash. The officers had a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. W. (Maricopa County) (DMC No. 3890):  Mr. W. was an ASU student who was arrested in his dorm room with 3 ounces of marijuana in various forms of packaging, and $1,200.00 in cash.  The officers had a search warrant when they arrived, and they knew about his marijuana dealings.  We were able to negotiate a “cooperation deal” with the ASU Police Department, and after Mr. W. fulfilled his commitment, no charges were brought against him.  He originally was facing years in prison.  Mr. W. went on to attend graduate school in California, and this arrest did not ruin his career path.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-possession-of-marijuana-for-sale/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR &#8211; Aggravated Assault –State v. Ms. T.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-aggravated-assault-%e2%80%93state-v-ms-t</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-aggravated-assault-%e2%80%93state-v-ms-t#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:30:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6006</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-121024): Ms. T. had gone to a bar where she saw her 15 year old daughter drinking. She confronted her daughter later that evening, and her daughter admitted she was using methamphetamine and was very [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-121024):  Ms. T. had gone to a bar where she saw her 15 year old daughter drinking.  She confronted her daughter later that evening, and her daughter admitted she was using methamphetamine and was very defiant.  Eventually the two were involved in a physical fight which left both bleeding.  The police were called and Ms. T. was arrested.  Originally she was charged with a misdemeanor assault, but then the City Prosecutor dismissed charges and routed the case to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for felony charges.  Ms. T. was charged with a felony, and was facing potential prison time.  We were able to negotiate a plea to a misdemeanor with zero days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-aggravated-assault-%e2%80%93state-v-ms-t/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR – Resisting Arrest &#8211; State v. Mr. G.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-state-v-mr-g</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-state-v-mr-g#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:29:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[73 Resisting Arrest Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6003</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-109798): Mr. G. was charged with felony criminal damage and felony resisting arrest. Mr. G. came home from a party and was extremely upset with his neighbor, and ended up damaging a door frame. Officers [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR2007-109798): Mr. G. was charged with felony criminal damage and felony resisting arrest.  Mr. G. came home from a party and was extremely upset with his neighbor, and ended up damaging a door frame.  Officers were called to scene, and as they spoke with Mr. G., they became concerned that something was in pocket.  They immediately grabbed him and threw him to the ground, although Mr. G. stated he had “done nothing wrong.”  After police tasered him and arrested him, we were able to convince the prosecutor that this should be dismissed to a mere misdemeanor, and they agreed.  He was originally facing a felony with up to 3 years in prison, but ultimately received a misdemeanor with zero days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-state-v-mr-g/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION- Disorderly Conduct with a Gun</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-disorderly-conduct-with-a-gun</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-disorderly-conduct-with-a-gun#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[61 Felony Disorderly Conduct/Threats Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=6000</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. R. (CR2006-174334-001): Mr. R. was in a dispute with his neighbor who was harassing his live-in girlfriend. The girlfriend was subsequently grabbed by the neighbor, and several days later Mr. R. went over to discuss this issue [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. R. (CR2006-174334-001): Mr. R. was in a dispute with his neighbor who was harassing his live-in girlfriend.  The girlfriend was subsequently grabbed by the neighbor, and several days later Mr. R. went over to discuss this issue with the neighbor.  At that time, Mr. R. had a gun which he had pulled out of his holster and displayed.  He originally was facing 1 ½ to 3 years in prison.  After thoroughly investigating the case and raising doubt as to the alleged victim’s credibility (specifically through emails we had discovered), we were able to get the case reduced to probation with no jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-disorderly-conduct-with-a-gun/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. M.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-m-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-m-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:28:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[112 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mesa, Arizona (DMC No. 7079): Mr. M. was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which the other drivers sustained numerous life-threatening injuries. When police arrived, Mr. M. and a second person in his car were standing outside. Although Mr. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mesa, Arizona (DMC No. 7079):  Mr. M. was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which the other drivers sustained numerous life-threatening injuries.  When police arrived, Mr. M. and a second person in his car were standing outside.  Although Mr. M. admitted to driving, it was found that the other person standing by the car was also impaired.  There was some question by the witnesses as to who the actual driver was.  Mr. M. subsequently provided a blood test which revealed a .161 BAC.  In addition to the question of who the actual driver was, we were also able to question the telephonic search warrant and affidavit the police secured to draw Mr. M.’s blood.  We were able to convince the County Attorney not to file any charges. Mr. M. was facing 5 to 15 years in prison. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-m-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-s-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-s-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:27:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[112 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Peoria, Arizona (DMC No. 7090): Mr. S. was traveling down a roadway in Peoria at approximately 40 mph at 11:00 o’clock at night when he was involved in a head-on collision. He had been drinking alcohol and witnesses claimed he [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peoria, Arizona (DMC No. 7090):  Mr. S. was traveling down a roadway in Peoria at approximately 40 mph at 11:00 o’clock at night when he was involved in a head-on collision.  He had been drinking alcohol and witnesses claimed he had drifted over the center median.  We were able to show that that other driver had misdemeanor warrants and a suspended license.  Combined with questions involving the actual accident scene, we were able to convince the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office not to press charges.  Mr. S. would have been facing 5 to 15 years in prison. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-s-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Aggravated Assault, State v. Ms. K.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-k-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-k-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:27:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County) (DMC No. 6977): Ms. K. had a very volatile relationship with her boyfriend and had recently broken up with him. When she went to his house to retrieve her items, he became abusive towards her. Ms. K. had [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County) (DMC No. 6977):  Ms. K. had a very volatile relationship with her boyfriend and had recently broken up with him.  When she went to his house to retrieve her items, he became abusive towards her.  Ms. K. had 2 male companions who then engaged in a fight with her boyfriend.  He suffered a concussion and some various broken bones as a result of the fight, and he sought to have her charged with Aggravated Assault and Conspiracy to Commit Aggravated Assault.  After having Ms. K. take a polygraph test (which we submitted to the Detective), we were able to show that in fact her ex-boyfriend had attacked her 2 male companions, who were utilizing self-defense.  No charges were brought against her, and she avoided being charged with a crime that carried a range of 5 to 15 years in prison.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-k-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Assault, State v. Mr. D.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-d</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-d#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[53 Assault/Domestic Violence Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5990</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. D. was accused of assault by his ex-girlfriend. She claimed that he tried to choke her and smother her with a pillow, while threatening to kill her. She then filed an Order of Protection against Mr. D. We were [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. D. was accused of assault by his ex-girlfriend.  She claimed that he tried to choke her and smother her with a pillow, while threatening to kill her.  She then filed an Order of Protection against Mr. D.  We were able to show that Mr. D. had not done any of these things, and there was no physical evidence to warrant any charges.  His ex-girlfriend was simply angry at him because she discovered he had been with another woman.  No charges were filed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-d/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Vehicular Aggravated Assault/Hit &amp; Run</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assaulthit-run-2</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assaulthit-run-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:25:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[112 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5987</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. D.: Mr. D. was involved in a traffic accident in which the victim sustained a broken wrist. Due to identification problems, we were able to negotiate a civil settlement, and the State agreed to not file charges.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. D.:  Mr. D. was involved in a traffic accident in which the victim sustained a broken wrist.  Due to identification problems, we were able to negotiate a civil settlement, and the State agreed to not file charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assaulthit-run-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Domestic Violence, State v. Mr. M.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-domestic-violence-state-v-mr-m</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-domestic-violence-state-v-mr-m#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:25:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[53 Assault/Domestic Violence Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5985</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. M. was drinking with his girlfriend. They got into an argument when he found out she had recently had sex with a friend of his. Neighbors called police when they heard the loud arguing. When they arrived, Mr. M.’s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. M. was drinking with his girlfriend.  They got into an argument when he found out she had recently had sex with a friend of his.  Neighbors called police when they heard the loud arguing.  When they arrived, Mr. M.’s girlfriend claimed she was “choked.”  After meeting with prosecutors, we were able to show there was a lack of physical evidence, combined with a neighbor who may have been a witness.  No charges were filed against Mr. M.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-domestic-violence-state-v-mr-m/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Child Abuse, State v. Ms. I.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-ms-i</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-ms-i#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:24:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[68 Child/Vulnerable Adult Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5982</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ms. I. worked in a group home for children with behavioral problems. A 13 year old boy (who was 5 foot 7 and weighed 180 pounds) claimed that he was physically assaulted by Ms. I., who was much smaller. We [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ms. I. worked in a group home for children with behavioral problems.  A 13 year old boy (who was 5 foot 7 and weighed 180 pounds) claimed that he was physically assaulted by Ms. I., who was much smaller.  We were able to meet with C.P.S. and detectives, and it was agreed that this case was “unsubstantiated.”  Charges were not filed against Ms. I. and she was allowed to keep her caretaker’s license.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-child-abuse-state-v-ms-i/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. N.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-n</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-n#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:24:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5980</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. N. was accused of getting into a fight with another individual and using brass knuckles. The other person incurred approximately $26,000.00 in medical bills. We were able to negotiate a civil settlement with the victim, and the police agreed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. N. was accused of getting into a fight with another individual and using brass knuckles.  The other person incurred approximately $26,000.00 in medical bills.  We were able to negotiate a civil settlement with the victim, and the police agreed not to pursue charges.  This prevented Mr. N. from facing 5 to 15 years in prison.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-n/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED- Aggravated Assault/Burglary, State v. Mr. P.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-aggravated-assaultburglary-state-v-mr-p</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-aggravated-assaultburglary-state-v-mr-p#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:23:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[117 Property Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[94 Burglary Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5977</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. P. was a security guard at a local apartment complex and was called to respond to a complaint of loud noise. When he arrived, one of the people at the party pointed a BB gun at Mr. P. A [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. P. was a security guard at a local apartment complex and was called to respond to a complaint of loud noise.  When he arrived, one of the people at the party pointed a BB gun at Mr. P.   A fight then ensued, and police officers arrived.  While breaking up the fight, one of the officers was struck by Mr. P.  We were able to convince the prosecutor not to file charges against Mr. P. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-aggravated-assaultburglary-state-v-mr-p/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. C.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-c</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-c#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:22:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[112 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5974</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. C. was accused of driving drunk and going through a stop sign, thereby striking an individual and breaking his collar bone. Detectives had hospital workers hold down Mr. C. in order to obtain blood. There was no proper warrant [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. C. was accused of driving drunk and going through a stop sign, thereby striking an individual and breaking his collar bone.  Detectives had hospital workers hold down Mr. C. in order to obtain blood.  There was no proper warrant and we were able to suppress the blood reading.  Because no blood would be coming into evidence, the prosecutor did not file charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-c/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. B.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-b</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-b#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:22:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5971</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. B. was accused of being intoxicated at a local nightclub. When he was contacted by bouncers, a fight ensued. Mr. B. was accused of breaking the bouncer’s jaw. We were able to show that the bouncers had actually attacked [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. B. was accused of being intoxicated at a local nightclub.  When he was contacted by bouncers, a fight ensued.  Mr. B. was accused of breaking the bouncer’s jaw.  We were able to show that the bouncers had actually attacked our client, and one of them had tripped and fallen, injuring himself.  Witnesses did not verify the bouncer’s story, and we were able to get the detectives and prosecutors to not file any charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-b/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Vehicular Aggravated Assault/Hit &amp; Run</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assaulthit-run</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assaulthit-run#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:21:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[112 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5968</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. B.: Mr. B was accused of a Hit &#38; Run accident with serious injury which occurred on the off-ramp of the freeway. Police indicated our client was the driver of the vehicle. We insisted that a photo-lineup [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. B.: Mr. B was accused of a Hit &amp; Run accident with serious injury which occurred on the off-ramp of the freeway.  Police indicated our client was the driver of the vehicle.  We insisted that a photo-lineup be shown to the victim.  The victim could not identify our client.  After working out an agreement to pay damages through insurance, the Detectives declined to file any charges against Mr. B.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assaulthit-run/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Felony Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-s</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-s#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[117 Property Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[92 Criminal Damage Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5965</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. S. had run into 2 old high school friends at a Jack in the Box. The 2 friends broke down the door to the store (because it had just closed), and 1 of them was caught by police. This [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. S. had run into 2 old high school friends at a Jack in the Box.  The 2 friends broke down the door to the store (because it had just closed), and 1 of them was caught by police.  This individual claimed Mr. S. had broken the door, and not the other suspect.  We were able to sit down with Tempe Police and explain what truly occurred.  No charges were brought against Mr. S.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-s/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Elder Abuse, State v. Ms. W.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-elder-abuse-state-v-ms-w</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-elder-abuse-state-v-ms-w#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:20:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[68 Child/Vulnerable Adult Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5963</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ms. W. was contacted by Adult Protective Services and by Detectives regarding her allegations that she had taken money and possessions from her 88 year old mother. We were able to show that her mother suffers from dementia, all money [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ms. W. was contacted by Adult Protective Services and by Detectives regarding her allegations that she had taken money and possessions from her 88 year old mother.  We were able to show that her mother suffers from dementia, all money was truly accounted for, and the items she had received from her mother were truly gifts.  Detectives and Adult Protective Services “unsubstantiated” the claim, and no charges were filed against Ms. W.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-elder-abuse-state-v-ms-w/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Aggravated Assault with a Gun</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:19:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5960</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. E.: Mr. E. called for an escort to come to his house. While she was inside, there was suddenly banging at his door. Mr. E. thought he was being robbed, and grabbed a gun to see what [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. E.:  Mr. E. called for an escort to come to his house.  While she was inside, there was suddenly banging at his door.  Mr. E. thought he was being robbed, and grabbed a gun to see what was going on.  It turned out to be the “bouncer” for the girl, who ended up pepper spraying Mr. E. and robbing him.  The police then showed up, and Mr. E. was accused of Aggravated Assault with a gun.  We were able to meet with detectives and explain what truly happened inside his house.  Detectives agreed not to file any charges against Mr. E.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Aggravated Assault on a Minor</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-on-a-minor</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-on-a-minor#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:19:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5957</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(DMC No. 4207) State v. Mr. G.: Mr. G. was arguing with his mother and sister when he was accused of attacking his sister’s 10 year-old son (his nephew). The grandmother and sister claimed that Mr. G. (who was 6’4” [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(DMC No. 4207) State v. Mr. G.:  Mr. G. was arguing with his mother and sister when he was accused of attacking his sister’s 10 year-old son (his nephew).  The grandmother and sister claimed that Mr. G. (who was 6’4” and weighed 350 lbs.) had kicked the boy in the side with heavy construction boots.  When the officer looked at the boy, he found no visible injuries.  In addition, we were able to point out other discrepancies in the story and convince the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to not file charges. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-on-a-minor/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MURDER NOT CHARGED – (DMC No. 4091) State v. Mr. C.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/murder-not-charged-%e2%80%93-dmc-no-4091-state-v-mr-c</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/murder-not-charged-%e2%80%93-dmc-no-4091-state-v-mr-c#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:18:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[65 Homicide Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5954</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mr. C. had been in alleged dispute with a competing rap artist when that individual was found stabbed to death inside his car at a local mall. Various people indicated that the most likely person to have done this was [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mr. C. had been in alleged dispute with a competing rap artist when that individual was found stabbed to death inside his car at a local mall.  Various people indicated that the most likely person to have done this was Mr. C.  We contacted the detective (who had been very harassing to our client), and indicated that he was not to speak with Mr. C. anymore as he was invoking his 5th Amendment Rights.  Over the years, detectives have executed various warrants for hair, saliva and blood samples.  None of these have ever revealed any evidence that Mr. C. was involved in this murder.  He has never been charged with any crime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/murder-not-charged-%e2%80%93-dmc-no-4091-state-v-mr-c/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Disorderly Conduct/Resisting Arrest/False Information</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conductresisting-arrestfalse-information</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conductresisting-arrestfalse-information#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:17:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[73 Resisting Arrest Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5952</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Ms. A. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. A839517CR): Mr. A. was at a house party on the reservation when police arrived. They entered and arrested her brother’s friend, when she intervened and began asking numerous questions of the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Ms. A. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. A839517CR): Mr. A. was at a house party on the reservation when police arrived.  They entered and arrested her brother’s friend, when she intervened and began asking numerous questions of the police.  The officers became frustrated and arrested her, claiming she was obstructing a criminal investigation, committing Disorderly Conducting, Resisting Arrest, and Providing False Information.  We were able to talk to the assigned prosecutor on the case, and he “furthered” the case back to police for more information.  Ultimately, the prosecutor made the decision to dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-disorderly-conductresisting-arrestfalse-information/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Assault, State v. Mr. O.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-o</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-o#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:17:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[51 Assault/Domestic Violence Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5949</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Mesa City Court, 2003-050299CR): Mr. O.’s wife was mentally ill and was on numerous medications. She was receiving treatment from Value Options when she attacked Mr. O. Police arrived and arrested both our client and his wife. Mrs. O. plead [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Mesa City Court, 2003-050299CR): Mr. O.’s wife was mentally ill and was on numerous medications.  She was receiving treatment from Value Options when she attacked Mr. O.  Police arrived and arrested both our client and his wife.  Mrs. O. plead guilty to assault and had already been sentenced.  We explained to the prosecutor that Mrs. O. was mentally ill and kept attacking Mr. O., and he had used a broom to keep her at bay.  Eventually, the prosecutor dismissed all charges for the reason that “the evidence will not support a conviction.”  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-assault-state-v-mr-o/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Aggravated Assault/Disorderly Conduct/Resisting Arrest</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assaultdisorderly-conductresisting-arrest</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assaultdisorderly-conductresisting-arrest#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:17:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[54 Felony Aggravated Assault Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[60 Felony Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[73 Resisting Arrest Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5947</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. D. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002-094134CR): Ms. D. was having a party in his back yard with numerous people and had been drinking when he was confronted by a young lady who spit in his face. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. D. (Maricopa County Superior Court No.  2002-094134CR): Ms. D. was having a party in his back yard with numerous people and had been drinking when he was confronted by a young lady who spit in his face.  He pushed her away, and the police were called.  Because she was 15 years of age, he was charged with Aggravated Assault.  When the police grabbed him to arrest him, he did not realize they were officers (as he was grabbed from behind).  He was then charged with Resisting Arrest and Aggravated Assault on Police Officers.  We immediately set the case to trial and began describing the facts to the prosecutor involved in the case.  Eventually the prosecutor moved to dismiss all charges against Mr. D.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assaultdisorderly-conductresisting-arrest/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MURDER REDUCED TO BURGLARY – State v. Mr. A.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/murder-reduced-to-burglary-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-a</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/murder-reduced-to-burglary-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-a#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[64 Homicide Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5943</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Gila County Superior Court No. 97-675CR): Mr. A. and numerous co-defendants were charged with meeting the victim at a casino and then going back to his residence where they shot to death with a shotgun and robbed him. We were [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Gila County Superior Court No. 97-675CR):  Mr. A. and numerous co-defendants were charged with meeting the victim at a casino and then going back to his residence where they shot to death with a shotgun and robbed him.  We were able to present numerous issues showing that Mr. A. did not know this crime was going to turn into a homicide.  Additionally, the State’s physical evidence fell apart when they were attempting to match a footprint on a door to Mr. A.  We eventually negotiated a plea agreement to Burglary with 3.5 years in prison.  The shooter received 25 years to life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/murder-reduced-to-burglary-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-a/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO DISORDERLY CONDUCT, NON-DANGEROUS</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-non-dangerous</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-non-dangerous#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:16:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[61 Felony Disorderly Conduct/Threats Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5940</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Disorderly Conduct with a Gun, State v. Ms. S. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-020930CR): Police were called when a neighbor complained that Ms. S. had fired a gun at the neighbor’s dog. An independent witness indicated he saw the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Disorderly Conduct with a Gun, State v. Ms. S. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-020930CR):  Police were called when a neighbor complained that Ms. S. had fired a gun at the neighbor’s dog.  An independent witness indicated he saw the dog approach Ms. S. and was barking at her when she fired the gun.  Because Ms. S. and the neighbor were having disputes over a common wall (which had not been built), the police felt she was attempting to threaten the neighbor.  Mr. S. was arrested and charged with Disorderly Conduct with a Gun, and was facing 1.5 to 3 years in prison.  We were able to get the charge reduced to a class 6 undesignated offense which included probation and 3 months in jail.  Ms. S. successfully completed probation and her conviction was then reduced to a misdemeanor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-disorderly-conduct-non-dangerous/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDMEANOR THEN FOUND NOT GUILTY AT BENCH TRIAL</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdmeanor-then-found-not-guilty-at-bench-trial</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdmeanor-then-found-not-guilty-at-bench-trial#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:15:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[1300 Bench Trial Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[54 Felony Aggravated Assault Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5938</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Aggravated Assault Against a Police Officer, State v. Mr. H. (City of Phoenix No. 20029032115CR): Mr. H. was at a party when shots were fired and police were called. When the police arrived, numerous people were throwing beer bottles at [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aggravated Assault Against a Police Officer, State v. Mr. H. (City of Phoenix No. 20029032115CR): Mr. H. was at a party when shots were fired and police were called.  When the police arrived, numerous people were throwing beer bottles at them.  One officer indicated he saw Mr. H. throw a 12 oz. beer bottle towards the officers.  The suspect was seen getting into a vehicle with 2 other people.  When Mr. H. was contacted by police, he denied ever throwing a bottle.  Although he was originally charged with Aggravated Assault Against a Police Officer, we were able to convince the Felony prosecutor to route the case to the Phoenix City Court for Misdemeanor Charges.  While at the City Court, the prosecutor was seeking 30 days in jail.  We had numerous witnesses who could attest that Mr. H. did not throw the beer bottle.  At a trial to the court on the misdemeanor, he was found Not Guilty, and all charges were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdmeanor-then-found-not-guilty-at-bench-trial/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION – Child Abuse/Aggravated Assault</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-abuseaggravated-assault</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-abuseaggravated-assault#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:15:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[67 Child/Vulnerable Adult Abused Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5935</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Ms. K. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 98-95353CR): Ms. K. brought her 10 week old infant into the hospital where doctors discovered he had from 5 broken ribs, a fractured femur, and fractures to each wrist, all approximately [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Ms. K. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 98-95353CR):  Ms. K. brought her 10 week old infant into the hospital where doctors discovered he had from 5 broken ribs, a fractured femur, and fractures to each wrist, all approximately 1 week old.  Ms. K. was initially the suspect, and was charged with very serious charges and facing years in prison.  Ms. K. denied ever hurting her child, and we were able to show that the injuries were most likely caused by the baby’s father (who was not married to Ms. K.).  Because the baby had been crying for days prior to her bringing him into the hospital, we were able to get the charges reduced to a low level child abuse for failure to seek immediate medical attention.  Ms. K. was sentenced to probation with zero days jail.  After she completed probation, the charge was designated as a Misdemeanor. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-child-abuseaggravated-assault/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR– Vehicular Aggravated Assault</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:14:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[14 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5932</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. J. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-124281CR): Mr. J. was backing his vehicle up when he struck a gate which fell on someone, resulting in a severe injury to the victim’s head and face. The police administered [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. J. (Maricopa County Superior Court No.  2003-124281CR): Mr. J. was backing his vehicle up when he struck a gate which fell on someone, resulting in a severe injury to the victim’s head and face.  The police administered Field Sobriety Tests to Mr. J., and he performed poorly on them.  Although he was initially charged with a Misdemeanor DUI, the prosecutor was looking into filing an Aggravated Assault Dangerous charge (which would carry a 5-15 year prison term) because a civil lawsuit had been filed against Mr. J.  We were assisting the civil attorney who was defending the civil lawsuit, and convinced the prosecutor to leave the case as a Misdemeanor DUI.  Mr. J. eventually received a Misdemeanor DUI with 1 day in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION – Aggravated Assault with a Gun/Kidnapping</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gunkidnapping</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gunkidnapping#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:14:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[72 Kidnapping Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5929</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. B. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002098785CR): Mr. B. was with his girlfriend, and both had been drinking. They got into an argument and she left his house with another gentleman and his keys. He hitched a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. B. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002098785CR):  Mr. B. was with his girlfriend, and both had been drinking.  They got into an argument and she left his house with another gentleman and his keys.  He hitched a ride to where she was at, and they continued arguing.  He eventually left, and she drove and picked him up.  They argued some more, and became involved in a physical altercation.  She claimed he had a gun and that he had thrown it in the canal.  No gun was ever found, however a knife was found inside the apartment and his girlfriend had been cut.  Originally, the State wanted 5 to 15 years in prison.  By enrolling Mr. B. in mental health counseling, we were able to reduce the plea to probation, 4 months in jail, and work release.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gunkidnapping/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Aggravated Assault with a Knife</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-knife</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-knife#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:12:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[54 Felony Aggravated Assault Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5926</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. K. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. A712296CR): Ms. K. was arrested for allegedly fighting with another girl and cutting her with a butcher knife. Although this carried a prison range of 5 to 15 years in prison, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. K. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. A712296CR):  Ms. K. was arrested for allegedly fighting with another girl and cutting her with a butcher knife.  Although this carried a prison range of 5 to 15 years in prison, we were able to negotiate a civil settlement with the alleged victim.  We also told the prosecutor there were issues of self defense.  The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office then dismissed all charges.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-knife/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Felony Child Abuse, State v. Mr. M.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-felony-child-abuse-state-v-mr-m</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-felony-child-abuse-state-v-mr-m#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[66 Child/Vulnerable Adult Abuse Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5923</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(A483683CR): Mr. M. had been going through a messy divorce and he had dropped off his son at a YMCA day camp. The son had ADHD, and was not happy about the divorce. He told the counselor that his father [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(A483683CR): Mr. M. had been going through a messy divorce and he had dropped off his son at a YMCA day camp.  The son had ADHD, and was not happy about the divorce.  He told the counselor that his father had hit him, and the counselor called CPS and police.  Mr. M. stated that he had simply spanked him for misbehaving.  We were able to show CPS and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office that this did not rise to the level of Child Abuse, and all charges were dismissed.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-felony-child-abuse-state-v-mr-m/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION- Aggravated Assault With a Gun</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:11:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5920</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. R. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2001093948CR) Mr. R. was engaged in an argument with his wife after they had both been drinking. He grabbed a gun because he intended to commit suicide. His wife saw him [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. R. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2001093948CR) Mr. R. was engaged in an argument with his wife after they had both been drinking.  He grabbed a gun because he intended to commit suicide.  His wife saw him grab the gun and struggled with him, which resulted in the gun being fired inside the house (no one was injured).  Police were then called and he was charged with Aggravated Assault/Dangerous against his wife.  The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office originally wanted a plea offer of 3.5 years.  We were able to get the case reduced to probation with 6 months in jail with work release.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR &#8211; Aggravated Assault with a Gun</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:11:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5918</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. S. (Pinal County Superior Court No. 200201198CR): Mr. S. had numerous arguments with his neighbor. He lived on a 10 acre piece of land, and had been in previous fight with his neighbor over a peacock coming [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. S. (Pinal County Superior Court No. 200201198CR):  Mr. S. had numerous arguments with his neighbor.  He lived on a 10 acre piece of land, and had been in previous fight with his neighbor over a peacock coming onto their property and doing “donuts” on his property.  The alleged victim was mad at Mr. S.’s dog and said he was going to go inside, get a shotgun, and blow the dog and Mr. S.’s family away.  While he was heading back into his house to retrieve a gun, Mr. S fired a gun into the air.  The neighbor also claimed something similar had happened on a previous Friday night.  Originally the State wanted 5 to 15 years in prison, but through extensive investigation we were able to get the Pinal County Attorney’s Office to reduce the plea to a Misdemeanor Disorderly Conduct with no jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Felony Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. H.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-h</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-h#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:10:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5915</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002097364CR): Mr. H. was charged with Criminal Damage after allegedly driving on a dirt road in the middle of the desert and striking a Palo Verde tree. This particular tree was smack in the middle [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002097364CR): Mr. H. was charged with Criminal Damage after allegedly driving on a dirt road in the middle of the desert and striking a Palo Verde tree.  This particular tree was smack in the middle of the dirt road, and the road split and went around each side of the tree.  Because police believed he was intoxicated at the time, and he had a prior felony conviction, they charged him with Felony Criminal Damage.  Even though his public defender had plead him to a couple of years in prison based on this charge, we were able to withdraw the plea, do an extensive investigation and have the charges dismissed entirely by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-h/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Felony Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. R.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-r</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-r#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:10:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5911</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Pinal County Superior Court No. 200201480CR): Mr. R. was going through a divorce when his soon to be ex-wife accused him of damaging her vehicle. Mr. R had been keeping an extensive log of activities due to previous false allegations [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Pinal County Superior Court No. 200201480CR):  Mr. R. was going through a divorce when his soon to be ex-wife accused him of damaging her vehicle.  Mr. R had been keeping an extensive log of activities due to previous false allegations by his wife.  Through an extensive investigation, we were able to show that she was untruthful, and the Pinal County Attorney’s Office dismissed all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-r/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Felony Criminal Damage, State v. Mr. C.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-c</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-c#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:10:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5909</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 0202109CR): Mr. C. was a dorm resident at ASU University. Another resident called police and claimed that approximately 2 months earlier she had witnessed him tearing down ceiling tiles in the dorm, which resulted in [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 0202109CR): Mr. C. was a dorm resident at ASU University.  Another resident called police and claimed that approximately 2 months earlier she had witnessed him tearing down ceiling tiles in the dorm, which resulted in approximately $250.00 in damage.  Due to the obvious discrepancies in her story, we were able to have the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-felony-criminal-damage-state-v-mr-c/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Misconduct Involving a Weapon</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-misconduct-involving-a-weapon</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-misconduct-involving-a-weapon#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:09:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[100 Misconduct Involving a Weapon Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[800 Miscellaneous Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5906</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. E. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. A339091CR): Mr. E. was a previously convicted felon who was residing in a motel. Police came to his room during “random registered guest check” and asked if they could search his [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. E. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. A339091CR): Mr. E. was a previously convicted felon who was residing in a motel.  Police came to his room during “random registered guest check” and asked if they could search his room.  When he said no, they searched his room and possessions anyway and found a weapon.  We were able to demonstrate this was an illegal search and charges were dismissed by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-misconduct-involving-a-weapon/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Resisting Arrest – State v. Mr. K.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-k</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-k#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[73 Resisting Arrest Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5903</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 0200160CR): Mr. K was stopped for an alleged DUI violation and taken to a police station. He requested to speak to his attorney multiple times, but police would not let him. Ultimately, the police obtained [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 0200160CR):  Mr. K was stopped for an alleged DUI violation and taken to a police station.  He requested to speak to his attorney multiple times, but police would not let him.  Ultimately, the police obtained a search warrant to draw his blood and he was strapped in a restraining chair while they drew his blood.  The police claimed that he was resisting arrest and fighting them when this occurred.  After extensive investigation, the case was set to an Evidentiary Hearing.  The State was unable to meet its burden and moved to dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-%e2%80%93-state-v-mr-k/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Resisting Arrest &amp; Criminal Damage</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-criminal-damage</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-criminal-damage#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:08:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[73 Resisting Arrest Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[90 Criminal Damage Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5901</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. A. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 0101602FE): Mr. A. was arrested for an alleged DUI violation in which his breath alcohol content was a .103. As he was being arrested, police claim that Mr. A. became angry [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. A. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 0101602FE):  Mr. A. was arrested for an alleged DUI violation in which his breath alcohol content was a .103.  As he was being arrested, police claim that Mr. A. became angry and slammed his head into the cross support pillar of the police vehicle.  He was charged with Resisting Arrest and Criminal Damage.  Due to the circumstances surrounding the case, we were able to have all charges dismissed by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-resisting-arrest-criminal-damage/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Disorderly Conduct with a Gun</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-with-a-gun</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-with-a-gun#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:08:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5898</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. C. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002012644CR): Mr. C. was at his house when renters let his ex-girlfriend in. She began taking some of Mr. C.’s belongings, and he waved a gun on the back patio. Neighbors [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. C. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002012644CR): Mr. C. was at his house when renters let his ex-girlfriend in.  She began taking some of Mr. C.’s belongings, and he waved a gun on the back patio.  Neighbors called the police, who subsequently arrested Mr. C.  We were able to demonstrate that he was justified in his defense of property, and all charges were dismissed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-with-a-gun/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED – Aggravated Assault with a Gun – State v. Ms. B.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-b</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-b#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[54 Felony Aggravated Assault Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5895</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 8577032CR): Ms. B.’s husband alleged that during an argument she had pointed a gun at him. In reality, she was throwing the guns from his gun collection out the window. He panicked, went outside, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 8577032CR): Ms. B.’s husband alleged that during an argument she had pointed a gun at him.  In reality, she was throwing the guns from his gun collection out the window.  He panicked, went outside, and yelled that she had pointed a gun at him.  We were able to show there was no true assault, and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office dismissed all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun-%e2%80%93-state-v-ms-b/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Aggravated Assault with a Weapon</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-weapon</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-weapon#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[54 Felony Aggravated Assault Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5892</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. H. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 200111038786CR): Mr. H. had two guests at his house that robbed him of all of his possessions. He spoke on a cell phone with one of the people, who agreed to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. H. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 200111038786CR): Mr. H. had two guests at his house that robbed him of all of his possessions.  He spoke on a cell phone with one of the people, who agreed to sell his laptop back to him.  When they arrived at a predetermined location, Mr. H. had a friend present.  A fight ensued and Mr. H.’s friend used a taser on one of the robbers.  We were able to show that Mr. H. never possessed a weapon, nor was he aware that his friend was going to use a weapon.  Therefore, all charges were dismissed by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-weapon/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED &#8211; Aggravated Assault with a Shotgun &#8211; State v. Mr. C.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-shotgun-state-v-mr-c</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-shotgun-state-v-mr-c#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:07:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[54 Felony Aggravated Assault Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5889</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 1999004298CR): Mr. C. called an Escort Service for a dancer to arrive at his home. He received a knock on his door from two dancers with a “bouncer.” They told him the fee was double, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 1999004298CR): Mr. C. called an Escort Service for a dancer to arrive at his home.  He received a knock on his door from two dancers with a “bouncer.”  They told him the fee was double, and when he declined, the “bouncer” insisted on an “appearance fee”.  When Mr. C. declined, he was attached by the bouncer.  He eventually got the bouncer to leave his house by pointing a shotgun at him.  We were able to show (through extensive interviews) that the bouncer had assaulted Mr. C. and was lying about Mr. C. “robbing” him.  We also filed a Motion to Suppress evidence based on an illegal search, and all charges were dismissed by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-shotgun-state-v-mr-c/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED- Aggravated Assault with a Gun &#8211; State v. Mr. H.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun-state-v-mr-h</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun-state-v-mr-h#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:06:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[54 Felony Aggravated Assault Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5887</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 200000378CR): Mr. H. was charged with Aggravated Assault with a Weapon after his girlfriend, (who was drunk at the time) told police he threatened her with a gun. We were able to show that she [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 200000378CR): Mr. H. was charged with Aggravated Assault with a Weapon after his girlfriend, (who was drunk at the time) told police he threatened her with a gun.  We were able to show that she was being untruthful and was highly intoxicated at the time of her allegation. The Pinal County Attorney’s Office subsequently filed a Motion to Dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-aggravated-assault-with-a-gun-state-v-mr-h/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED- Disorderly Conduct &#8211; State v. Mr. V.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-v</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-v#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5885</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Kyrene Justice Court No. JC2006131746): Mr. V. was at Axis/Radius nightclub in Scottsdale when a fight broke out. As all parties were being escorted from the club, police claim that Mr. V. was seen shouting profanities and attempting to push [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Kyrene Justice Court No. JC2006131746): Mr. V. was at Axis/Radius nightclub in Scottsdale when a fight broke out.  As all parties were being escorted from the club, police claim that Mr. V. was seen shouting profanities and attempting to push his way towards others involved in the fight.  He eventually used profanity towards the officers, and she was shot six to eight times with a pepperball gun by police.  He was then taken to the ground and handcuffed.  We were able to show the prosecutor that Mr. V. was actually trying to protect his brother, who had been beaten up by other patrons, and he was acting reasonably in the situation.  We also questioned the officers’ version of the facts.  The prosecutor then dismissed all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-disorderly-conduct-state-v-mr-v/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED- Threatening &amp; Intimidating &#8211; State v. Ms. R.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-threatening-intimidating-state-v-ms-r</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-threatening-intimidating-state-v-ms-r#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:05:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5882</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(University Lakes Justice Court No. JC2006161187): Ms. R. was a student at ASU. She had gotten into an argument with her dorm roommate, who claimed that Ms. R. was threatening her without specifically stating she would do physical violence. The [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(University Lakes Justice Court No. JC2006161187): Ms. R. was a student at ASU.  She had gotten into an argument with her dorm roommate, who claimed that Ms. R. was threatening her without specifically stating she would do physical violence. The case was set to bench trial, and on the day of trial the State had not subpoenaed their necessary witnesses.  The State attempted to continue the case, and we objected.  When the State moved to dismiss so they could merely re-file the case on a later date, we asked the judge to dismiss the case “with prejudice.”  That motion was granted.  The State then moved for a motion to reconsider and they were denied.  Ms. R. was facing a possibility of up to six months in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-threatening-intimidating-state-v-ms-r/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. M.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-m</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-m#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:03:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[112 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5880</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mesa, Arizona (DMC No. 7079): Mr. M. was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which the other drivers sustained numerous life-threatening injuries. When police arrived, Mr. M. and a second person in his car were standing outside. Although Mr. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mesa, Arizona (DMC No. 7079):  Mr. M. was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which the other drivers sustained numerous life-threatening injuries.  When police arrived, Mr. M. and a second person in his car were standing outside.  Although Mr. M. admitted to driving, it was found that the other person standing by the car was also impaired.  There was some question by the witnesses as to who the actual driver was.  Mr. M. subsequently provided a blood test which revealed a .161 BAC.  In addition to the question of who the actual driver was, we were also able to question the telephonic search warrant and affidavit the police secured to draw Mr. M.’s blood.  We were able to convince the County Attorney not to file any charges. Mr. M. was facing 5 to 15 years in prison. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-m/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Vehicular Aggravated Assault, State v. Mr. S.,</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-s</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-s#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[112 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[15 Vehicular Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[200 DUI/Vehicular Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5877</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Peoria, Arizona (DMC No. 7090): Mr. S. was traveling down a roadway in Peoria at approximately 40 mph at 11:00 o’clock at night when he was involved in a head-on collision. He had been drinking alcohol and witnesses claimed he [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peoria, Arizona (DMC No. 7090):  Mr. S. was traveling down a roadway in Peoria at approximately 40 mph at 11:00 o’clock at night when he was involved in a head-on collision.  He had been drinking alcohol and witnesses claimed he had drifted over the center median.  We were able to show that that other driver had misdemeanor warrants and a suspended license.  Combined with questions involving the actual accident scene, we were able to convince the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office not to press charges.  Mr. S. would have been facing 5 to 15 years in prison. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-vehicular-aggravated-assault-state-v-mr-s/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Aggravated Assault, State v. Ms. K.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-k</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-k#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:02:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5874</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County) (DMC No. 6977): Ms. K. had a very volatile relationship with her boyfriend and had recently broken up with him. When she went to his house to retrieve her items, he became abusive towards her. Ms. K. had [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County) (DMC No. 6977):  Ms. K. had a very volatile relationship with her boyfriend and had recently broken up with him.  When she went to his house to retrieve her items, he became abusive towards her.  Ms. K. had 2 male companions who then engaged in a fight with her boyfriend.  He suffered a concussion and some various broken bones as a result of the fight, and he sought to have her charged with Aggravated Assault and Conspiracy to Commit Aggravated Assault.  After having Ms. K. take a polygraph test (which we submitted to the Detective), we were able to show that in fact her ex-boyfriend had attacked her 2 male companions, who were utilizing self-defense.  No charges were brought against her, and she avoided being charged with a crime that carried a range of 5 to 15 years in prison.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-aggravated-assault-state-v-ms-k/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT CHARGED – Assault/Domestic Violence, State v. Mr. C.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assaultdomestic-violence-state-v-mr-c</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assaultdomestic-violence-state-v-mr-c#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:01:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[115 Assault/Violent Crime Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[500 Assault/Violent Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[53 Assault/Domestic Violence Pre-Charge Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[900 Pre-Charge Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5872</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Phoenix Police Department) (DMC No. 7063): Mr. C. had been married to a wife whom he had found on the internet from another country. They had a child in common. They began arguing when his wife took out a knife [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Phoenix Police Department) (DMC No. 7063):  Mr. C. had been married to a wife whom he had found on the internet from another country.  They had a child in common.  They began arguing when his wife took out a knife and cut him on the arm and ran outside with their baby.  Police arrived and observed marks on his wife’s face.  Each said the other person had struck them first.  Since the husband and wife were now getting a divorce and because the information received was in dispute, we were able to convince the Phoenix Police Department to not file charges. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/not-charged-%e2%80%93-assaultdomestic-violence-state-v-mr-c/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR- Theft of Means of Transportation Sale of Counterfeit Merchandise</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-theft-of-means-of-transportation-sale-of-counterfeit-merchandise</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-theft-of-means-of-transportation-sale-of-counterfeit-merchandise#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:59:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[45 Theft Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5870</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. D. (Tempe City Court No. 03-672467): Mr. D. had worked for a local car dealership, and he had taken 3 different vehicles and driven them for extended periods of time without permission. In some cases, the vehicles [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. D. (Tempe City Court No. 03-672467):  Mr. D. had worked for a local car dealership, and he had taken 3 different vehicles and driven them for extended periods of time without permission.  In some cases, the vehicles were driven for several thousand miles, thereby reducing the value of the vehicles substantially.  After conducting extensive witness interviews, we were able to show that Mr. D. did have permission given to him by his General Manager, however, he did question the validity of this permission.  On the eve of trial, the prosecutor extended a misdemeanor deal with zero days in jail and small amount of restitution.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-theft-of-means-of-transportation-sale-of-counterfeit-merchandise/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED- Theft of Means of Transportation</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-theft-of-means-of-transportation</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-theft-of-means-of-transportation#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:58:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[44 Theft Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5868</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. D. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-020415CR) Mr. D. was charged with class 3 felony Theft of Means of Transportation. In this particular case, Mr. D. asked the alleged victim if he could borrow his truck, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. D. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-020415CR) Mr. D. was charged with class 3 felony Theft of Means of Transportation.  In this particular case, Mr. D. asked the alleged victim if he could borrow his truck, and the alleged victim agreed.  When Mr. D. returned, he indicated he had loaned the truck to “somebody else.”  The victim felt that Mr. D. had exchanged his truck for drugs and called the police.  The vehicle was recovered, and due to the fact that the victim also knew the person Mr. D. had lent the vehicle to, we convinced the State to dismiss all charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-theft-of-means-of-transportation/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Embezzlement, State v. Ms. A.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-embezzlement-state-v-ms-a</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-embezzlement-state-v-ms-a#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:58:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5865</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-014933CR): Ms. A. was accused of embezzling $3,000.00 from a governmental agency by having a falsified invoice submitted regarding a charity golf tournament. Although the prosecutor originally wanted a felony conviction with jail time, we [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-014933CR):  Ms. A. was accused of embezzling $3,000.00 from a governmental agency by having a falsified invoice submitted regarding a charity golf tournament.  Although the prosecutor originally wanted a felony conviction with jail time, we were able to delve in Ms. A.’s various personal issues, and the case was reduced to a class 6 non-designated felony.   Ms. A. was given 1 year probation and zero days in jail.  After the 1 year of probation, her conviction was then designated as a misdemeanor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-embezzlement-state-v-ms-a/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DISMISSED- Fraudulent Schemes, State v. Mr. B.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-fraudulent-schemes-state-v-mr-b</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-fraudulent-schemes-state-v-mr-b#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:58:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[42 Fraudulent Schemes Dismissals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-014902CR): Mr. B. was accused of arriving at a local Chevrolet dealer in an attempt to obtain an engine and water pump valued at over $1,500.00 with a fraudulent purchase order from another Ford dealer. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-014902CR):  Mr. B. was accused of arriving at a local Chevrolet dealer in an attempt to obtain an engine and water pump valued at over $1,500.00 with a fraudulent purchase order from another Ford dealer.  Apparently the other Ford dealer did not authorize this transaction, and all transactions were recorded on video tape.  We were able to show the prosecutor that our client was “duped” into picking up the parts by a neighbor across the street.  The neighbor had recently been released from prison and had his own criminal history.  We had Mr. B. undergo a polygraph, which he passed.  We then provided that polygraph to the prosecutor, and all charges were subsequently dismissed “in the interests of justice.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/dismissed-fraudulent-schemes-state-v-mr-b/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Embezzlement, State v. Mr. S.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-embezzlement-state-v-mr-s</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-embezzlement-state-v-mr-s#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:57:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5859</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-014271CR): Mr. S. worked for a local bottling company. He allegedly altered certain invoices in order to embezzle $10,000.00. Initially, the State was seeking a felony with jail time. We were able to have the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2003-014271CR):  Mr. S. worked for a local bottling company.  He allegedly altered certain invoices in order to embezzle $10,000.00.  Initially, the State was seeking a felony with jail time.  We were able to have the charges reduced to Theft, a class 6 non-designated felony.  Ms. S. was given probation with no jail, and after he successfully completed probation the case was designated as a misdemeanor.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-embezzlement-state-v-mr-s/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR – Theft/Possession of Burglary Tools/Burglary</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-theftpossession-of-burglary-toolsburglary</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-theftpossession-of-burglary-toolsburglary#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:57:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[45 Theft Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[94 Burglary Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5856</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. C. (Peoria City Court No. 2003-000888CR): Mr. C. was initially arrested because a victim claimed that she observed 2 males removing lug nuts and trying to steal 4 wheel covers from her vehicle. Mr. C. was arrested [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. C. (Peoria City Court No. 2003-000888CR):  Mr. C. was initially arrested because a victim claimed that she observed 2 males removing lug nuts and trying to steal 4 wheel covers from her vehicle.  Mr. C. was arrested and charged with Burglary, Possession of Burglary Tools, and Theft.  We were able to show the prosecutor that due to the low value of the property ($285.00) that the case should be routed to the City Prosecutor’s Office for misdemeanor charges.  We then negotiated to have him charged with a single misdemeanor Theft.  Mr. C. paid a $350.00 fine and served no jail time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-theftpossession-of-burglary-toolsburglary/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR &#8211; Insurance Fraud &#8211; State v. Ms. M</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-insurance-fraud-state-v-ms-m</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-insurance-fraud-state-v-ms-m#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5853</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(20020151938CR): Ms. M. was accused of filing a false insurance claim for over $10,000 after her house had been burglarized. Although the County Attorney’s Office wanted a designated felony and jail time, we were able to negotiate a deal to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(20020151938CR): Ms. M. was accused of filing a false insurance claim for over $10,000 after her house had been burglarized.  Although the County Attorney’s Office wanted a designated felony and jail time, we were able to negotiate a deal to a class 1 misdemeanor without any jail being imposed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-insurance-fraud-state-v-ms-m/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR – Embezzlement, State v. Ms. R.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-embezzlement-state-v-ms-r</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-embezzlement-state-v-ms-r#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002095418CR): Ms. R. was accused of embezzling over $100,000.00 from a former employer. Through negotiations with the prosecutor and the victim, we were able to secure $55,000.00 in restitution (up front) in exchange for a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002095418CR):  Ms. R. was accused of embezzling over $100,000.00 from a former employer.  Through negotiations with the prosecutor and the victim, we were able to secure $55,000.00 in restitution (up front) in exchange for a plea to misdemeanor charge with zero days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-misdemeanor-%e2%80%93-embezzlement-state-v-ms-r/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION – Burglary with priors, State v. Mr. L.</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-burglary-with-priors-state-v-mr-l</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-burglary-with-priors-state-v-mr-l#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[700 Property Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[94 Burglary Victories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002-080498CR): Mr. L. had prior convictions in another state for Breaking and Entering. He had served 2 years in prison in that state several years earlier. He was now charged with breaking into a house [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002-080498CR):  Mr. L. had prior convictions in another state for Breaking and Entering.  He had served 2 years in prison in that state several years earlier.  He was now charged with breaking into a house and stealing money.  Due to his extensive prior criminal history, Mr. L. was given a 5 year prison offer through his prior attorney.  After terminating the other attorney and hiring us, we were able to show that he had a tragic prior circumstances (due to the fact that he was from Vietnam and was a refugee), and we were able to secure a plea to Trespassing with probation and 9 months of jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-burglary-with-priors-state-v-mr-l/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION – Trafficking in Stolen Property</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-trafficking-in-stolen-property</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-trafficking-in-stolen-property#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:55:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[45 Theft Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5844</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. H. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002018916CR &#38; 200200173CR): Mr. H. had 2 prior felony convictions, and was now accused of selling 2 stolen vehicles to undercover police. The State originally wanted 2.5 years in prison, however, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. H. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002018916CR &amp; 200200173CR):  Mr. H. had 2 prior felony convictions, and was now accused of selling 2 stolen vehicles to undercover police.  The State originally wanted 2.5 years in prison, however, we were able to show (through mitigation), that Mr. H. had suffered from drug addiction.  We were able to have the plea reduced to probation with 120 days in jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-%e2%80%93-trafficking-in-stolen-property/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REDUCED TO PROBATION &#8211; Fraudulent Schemes and Embezzlement</title>
		<link>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-fraudulent-schemes-and-embezzlement</link>
		<comments>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-fraudulent-schemes-and-embezzlement#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Staff</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[400 Theft/Fraud Crimes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Case Victories]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmcantor.com/?p=5842</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Mr. J. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002099493): Mr. Johnson was employed at Costco. He was accused of embezzling approximately $7,500.00 worth of cash and merchandise. Initially, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office wanted prison time. We were able [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>State v. Mr. J. (Maricopa County Superior Court No. 2002099493): Mr. Johnson was employed at Costco.  He was accused of embezzling approximately $7,500.00 worth of cash and merchandise.  Initially, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office wanted prison time.  We were able to work out a civil resolution with the victims, and reduce the charge to probation and no jail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://dmcantor.com/case-victories/reduced-to-probation-fraudulent-schemes-and-embezzlement/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

