State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 8098)

MINOR in CONSUMPTION of ALCOHOL and DISORDERLY CONDUCT REDUCED to PUBLIC NUISANCE with ZERO DAYS in Jail – State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 8098) (University Lakes Justice Court No. JC2008-112277): Mr. S attended a fraternity party for the Sigma Chi fraternity at Arizona State University. As he was leaving the party, Police were outside and they immediately grabbed and cuffed Mr. S. When he asked why he was being arrested, they stated “for throwing ping pong balls”. He was then cited for Minor in Consumption under Arizona Revised Statute ARS 4-244.40 and for Disorderly Conduct. During the course of this case, I showed the Prosecutor that they never offered Mr. S a blood test, nor did they ever ask if he had been drinking. The Prosecutor agreed to dismiss the Minor in Consumption charge. As to the Disorderly Conduct charge, that was reduced to Public Nuisance with Zero days in Jail.

January 2, 2016

January 2, 2016 By dmcantor 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 100I Fake ID Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 6384)

MINOR in POSSESSION of ALCOHOL and FALSE ID USED to PURCHASE ALCOHOL DISMISSED – State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 6384) (University Lakes Justice Court JC2006-106815): Mr. S and his friend pulled up to a liquor store in Tempe, Arizona, and they were observed by Officers to look “very young”. After Mr. S and his friend left the liquor store with a package, they got in their car and left. The Officer’s then stopped them claiming that they had made an illegal lane change. Mr. S was subsequently cited and charged with minor in possession of alcohol per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 4-244.9 and he was charged with using a fake ID to purchase alcohol per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 4-241(C).

We argued to the Prosecutor that the stop was a “pretext stop”, and that the Officers had “no reasonable suspicion” to stop Mr. S. The Prosecutor allowed Mr. S. to complete an alcohol class and in exchange, he dismissed all charges against him.

September 1, 2015

September 1, 2015 By dmcantor 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 101 Misc. Crimes Jury/Bench Trial Victories, 1300 Bench Trial Victories, 1300A Complete Bench Trial Acquittal / All Criminal Charges, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. L (DMC No. 9298)

NOT GUILTY/ COMPLETE ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL: MINOR IN CONSUMPTION– State v. Mr. L (DMC No. 9298) (University Lakes Justice Court JC2009-157783): Mr. L was with a group of people in a car that was stopped at Lemon Road and Rural Road in Tempe, Arizona. Mr. L and another passenger had alcohol in their breath, and they were questioned about drinking alcohol. Mr. L was only 18 years old and he admitted he had drank earlier in the night. He was subsequently given a Breath Test which revealed a .106 BAC. At Bench Trial, we argued that the Statue (A.R.S.§ 4-244.41) required the alcohol to be consumed within the Jurisdiction of the University Lakes Justice Court. Because the Officer never asked Mr. L where he had consumed the alcohol, the State could not prove that he consumed within the Jurisdiction. The Judge agreed, and Dismissed all charges against Mr. L.

January 2, 2015

January 2, 2015 By dmcantor 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. O. (DMC No. 6273)

MINOR in CONSUMPTION of ALCOHOL DISMISSED due to IDENTIFICATION ISSUE – State v. Mr. O (DMC No. 6273) (University Lakes Justice Court JC2006-106801): Mr. O lived in a fraternity house at Arizona State University and there was a party at his house. Police were called because somebody had punched the back of a car and committed Criminal Damage. When Police arrived, they saw 12 people inside one of the rooms at Adelphi Commons, and they subjected everyone to a Portable Breath Test. They claimed that Mr. O tested a .099 BAC.

Mr. O was subsequently charged with Minor in Consumption of Alcohol per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 4-244.40. During subsequent interviews, the Officers weren’t able to identify Mr. O from a photo lineup. We were then able to convince the Prosecutor to dismiss all charges against Mr. O.

August 25, 2014

August 25, 2014 By dmcantor 100F False Reporting Victories, 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 100I Fake ID Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, Desert Ridge Justice Court Victories

State v. Ms. T (DMC No. 8961)

REDUCED | FALSE INFORMATION, FAKE ID and MINOR in POSSESSION of ALCOHOL REDUCED to MINOR in CONSUMPTION with ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Ms. T. (DMC No. 8961) (Desert Ridge Justice Court JC2009-113691): Ms. T. was seen standing with a beer in hand by a plain clothes officer on foot patrol. He surmised that she looked too young to drink, and asked her for her ID. She provided a fake ID and said she was 21 years old. She was ultimately arrested for Fake ID and False Information, and she provided a .065 breath test. We were able to have the Fake ID, False Information and Minor in Possession of Alcohol charges dismissed in exchange for a single plea to a Minor in Consumption with a small fine and classes.

January 28, 2014

January 28, 2014 By dmcantor 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 101 Misc. Crimes Jury/Bench Trial Victories, 1300 Bench Trial Victories, 1300A Complete Bench Trial Acquittal / All Criminal Charges, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, Justice Court Victories, White Tank Justice Court Victories

State v. Ms. E (DMC No. 10177)

NOT GUILTY/COMPLETE ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL | MINOR in CONSUMPTION – State v. Ms. E. (DMC No. 10177) (White Tank Justice Court JC2011-102129): Ms. E. was tailgating prior to the Fiesta Bowl game in the stadium parking lot when an officer walked up and asked her submit to a portable breath test which revealed a .023 BAC. He also forced her to answer the question as to whether she had been drinking, and then he cited her. At Bench Trial, the Officer could not state why he had probable cause to contact Ms. E. in the first place. In addition, he had no specific recollection of Ms. E. The Judge found Ms. E. not guilty of all charges.

December 18, 2011

December 18, 2011 By dmcantor 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 2100 Superior Court Victories, 700 Property Crime Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, 95 Trespass Victories, Case Victories, Yavapai County Superior Court Victories

State v. Mr. M (DMC No.7139)

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.

November 17, 2011

November 17, 2011 By dmcantor 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 118 Miscellaneous Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7064)

NOT CHARGED | MINOR IN POSSESSION / CONSUMPTION OF ACLOHOL – 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.

September 27, 2011

September 27, 2011 By dmcantor 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, White Tank Justice Court Victories

State v. Ms. E (DMC No.)

DISMISSED | UNDERAGE DRINKING – (White Tank Justice Court JC201102129) Ms. E was at the University of Phx stadium, celebrating with her family before the college football championship game. Police cited her for underage drinking. At her trial, we got her portable breath test result thrown out by the Judge. Then we got her admission to drinking thrown out as a coerced statement to the police. Finally, we successfully argued that the odor of alcohol the officer claimed he smelled off of her was insufficient evidence to convict her. The Judge agreed and ruled that Ms. E was not guilty.

Our Location

Free Consultation