DISMISSED | SEXUAL ABUSE – (DMC No. 3497): Mr. J. was accused of groping a male room service employee who showed up to his hotel suite. Mr. J. claimed the contact was consensual, and we were able to discuss this with the County Attorney and have all charges dismissed.
DISMISSED | CHILD MOLESTATION – 9808362CR) (DMC No. 652)
Mr. L. was charged with 4 counts of Sexual Misconduct with a Minor, and 4 counts of Child Molestation. These allegations were brought forth by his daughter and granddaughter. They claimed the last incident had occurred 8 years prior, and this came up during counseling sessions. Mr. L. had been having financial issues with his daughter, and he denied these allegations and wished to proceed by way of jury trial. On the day of trial, it became apparent that these allegations may not be true, and the State moved to dismiss all charges. Mr. L. would have spent the rest of his life in prison had he been convicted.
REDUCED | CHILD MOLESTATION – (DMC No. 2535) (Maricopa County Superior Court No.: 2001-008411 CR): Mr. D. was accused of molesting his girlfriend’s ten (10) year old daughter. This accusation came from the girl’s biological father, and the mother had previously had all four (4) of her children taken away from her for neglect. Examinations were inconclusive. Although there were four (4) separate counts of Child Molestation, which placed Mr. D at potentially spending between 40 and 96 years in prison, we were able to plead to one count of attempt with probation and one (1) year of jail time with work release.
REDUCED | POSSESSION AND DISTRIBUTION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY State v. Mr. L. (DMC No. 3901) (Maricopa County Superior Court No.: 2003-005553CR): Mr. L. was a student at ASU who lived in a dormitory. He discovered a website which rewarded people listening to music by giving them points which could be redeemed for prizes. Mr. L constructed a computer program which allowed numerous people to listen to music while he would personally accumulate the point. During the course of this site, child pornography was received on this website and distributed. He was subsequently arrested and charged with ten (10) counts of possession of child pornography. The mandatory minimum he was facing was 100 years in prison. We were able to show the prosecutor the innocent intent of this website, combined with Mr. L’s youth, in order to obtain a plea to attempt (the lowest level felony). Although Mr. L had typed in certain requests which could be construed as a solicitation for child pornography, he did receive probation with one (1) years of jail time with work release. The norm on these cases is ten (10) years in prison.
REDUCED | SEXUAL ASSAULT (DMC No. 4219) (Maricopa County Superior Court No.: 2003-019710CR): Mr. S. was a massage therapist at a local resort. The allegedly victim had three (3) beers prior to having her massage (in which she requested a male masseuse). The alleged victim claimed that Mr. S had brushed her vagina one time, and then put his thumb in her vagina one time. The alleged victim then paid for the massage and left a tip for Mr. S, prior to reporting the incident. She then reported the incident and Mr. S was interviewed by police. He stated that the alleged victim was asleep, when she moved all of a sudden and he accidentally brushed her vagina one time. We were able to discover that the alleged victim had made a prior sexual assault claims in the past, and had looked to file a civil suit for money. We were ultimately able to convince the State to dismiss all charges. This occurred after Mr. S had already spent several months in jail, and was facing years in prison.
REDUCED | SEXUAL ASSAULT – (DMC No. 260) (Maricopa County Superior Court No.: 97-92798CR): Mr. W. worked at a local fast food restaurant as a 21 year old manager. He engaged in sexual conduct with a seventeen (17) year old worker, who then claimed that she was coerced into sex by her boss. Her parents had hired an attorney and filed a law suit seeking millions of dollars in compensation. Mr. W was charged with Sexual Assault. We were able to explain to the prosecutor that this was actually consensual sex with a minor over the age of fifteen (15) and should be a Class 6 Undesignated Felony. Mr. W was sentenced to probation, and at the completion of probation his charge was designated a misdemeanor. He received no days in jail, even though he was initially facing years in prison.
State v. Mr. P. (San Marcos Justice Court No. TR2006166071): Mr. P. was driving his friend’s car (in which his friend was a passenger), when they had a collision with the containment wall on the I-10. The passenger had struck his head, and Mr. P. drove to an apartment complex parking lot where parked the vehicle and walked away. His passenger then called 911 and police made contact with Mr. P. They were not going to arrest him for DUI because too much time had passed, yet they did cite him for Hit & Run. We were able to show that since his passenger knew who he was and where to find him, this was not truly “leaving the scene of an accident” without an exchange of information. The State agreed and amended the charge to a civil speeding ticket with a minor fine.
REDUCED | DRIVING ON A SUSPENDED LICENSE – State v. Mr. H. (Scottsdale Municipal Court No. TR-2006033384): Mr. H. was pulled over for having a cracked windshield. The officer informed Mr. H. that his license was suspended, but Mr. H. indicated he thought he had taken care of this license suspension because he had renewed his New Mexico license prior to coming to Arizona on vacation. Due to the fact that Mr. H. was never told he would have to pay a reinstatement fee in Arizona, we were able to get that charge dismissed in exchange for a cracked windshield ticket.
(Pinal County Superior Court No. CV200601737): Mr. M. was in a dispute with his neighbor. Mr. M. was facing criminal charges for discharging a firearm in his backyard. The neighbor then filed an Injunction Against Harassment, and we were able to get that Injunction dismissed. This was important because had it not been dismissed, Mr. M. would have been at risk to have his neighbor call the police at any time he wished, thereby causing Mr. M. to go to jail.
(Mesa Municipal Court No. 2006056073): Mr. B. was driving with his wife when another vehicle pulled out directly in front of him. The other vehicle kept cutting off Mr. B. and was slamming on his brakes. The other driver slammed on his brakes and caused Mr. B. to rear-end him. The other driver took off, and Mr. B. pulled over to check out the damage to his vehicle. When Mr. B. was back on the roadway, the other driver pulled up next to him and said he had called police. We were able to show that Mr. B. had not absconded from the area, therefore the criminal charge was dismissed and he was issued only a speeding ticket.