REDUCED | LURING A MINOR and CHILD PROSTITUTION REDUCED to PROBATION with 2 YEARS JAIL – State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 5618) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2004-136060): Mr. K. was accused of going online and soliciting a 14 year old for various sex acts for $100. According to Detectives he raised that offer to $175 when he was told that the 14 year old was a virgin. In reality, the 14 year old was an undercover Detective running a “sting” operation. Because both counts were dangerous crimes against children (DCAC), Mr. K. was facing a minimum of 23 years in prison (day for day). We were able to get the case reduced to probation, with 2 years of jail which involved furlough, allowing Mr. K. to be released during the day so he could work.
May 1, 2014
REDUCED | VEHICULAR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (.402 BAC) REDUCED to probation and 6 months in jail – State v. Ms. S. (DMC No. 4627) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2002-097523): Ms. S. rear-ended a vehicle that was stopped at a red light while she was travelling 45 MPH. The victim suffered a spine fracture as well as multiple lacerations to his body. Ms. S. subsequently provided blood at the hospital which revealed a .402 blood alcohol. She was originally charged with an AGGRAVATED ASSAULT DANGEROUS which subjected her to potentially 5 to 15 years of prison minimum. We were able to convince the prosecutor to reduce it to a non-dangerous offense with probation and a stipulated 6 months in jail. Ms. S. had gone through rehab and did not drink anymore. She was allowed to serve her 6 months in jail in Flagstaff at the Coconino County Jail (where the weather is much cooler).
April 28, 2014
DISMISSED | 3 COUNTS of TRANSPORTATION of DRUGS FOR SALE (crack), POSSESSION of DANGEROUS DRUGS and DRUG PARAPHERNALIA DISMISSED – State v. Mr. J. (DMC No. 11060) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2011-164121): Mr. J. was set up by undercover officers on three separate occasions in order to purchase crack cocaine. While surveilling Mr. J., they eventually pulled him over in his car and found drug paraphernalia. We were able to work with Detectives in a cooperative manner, and secured a dismissal from the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. Mr. J. does not have any convictions on his record for these alleged crimes.
April 28, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 600 Drug Crimes Victories, 82B Possession/Paraphernalia Reduced, 84 Drug Sales/Transportation Reduced, 86 Miscellaneous Drug Crime Victories, 86C Use of a Wire Communication on a Drug Transaction Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories
REDUCED | POSSESSION of MARIJUANA for SALE, USE of a WIRE in DRUG TRANSACTION and POSSESSION of DRUG PARAPHERNALIA REDUCED to FACILITATION/SOLICITATION class 6 open/misdemeanor with 4 MONTHS PROBATION and ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Mr. A. (DMC No. 11048) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2011-163521): Mr. A. and his roommate were being surveilled by undercover police officers for allegedly selling marijuana. Eventually, a raid on the apartment occurred and marijuana and drug paraphernalia were found throughout the apartment. Mr. A. was also charged with using a cell phone in drug sales. Were able to convince the Prosecutor to reduce his charges down to a simple Facilitation and Solicitation with a class 6 “open”, which was designated as a misdemeanor immediately at sentencing.
April 28, 2014
DISMISSED | POSSESSION of MARIJUANA for SALE, USE of a WIRE in DRUG TRANSACTION and POSSESSION of DRUG PARAPHERNALIA DISMISSED – State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 11029) (Maricopa County Attorney CR2011-163521): Mr. R. was under surveillance for allegedly selling marijuana out of his house. Officers raided his house and found drug paraphernalia and numerous items indicative of drug sales. They also determined that he had been using his cell phone to sell marijuana. With the cooperation agreement with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and investigating Detectives, the State agreed to dismiss all charges.
April 28, 2014
UNLAWFUL FLIGHT (8 mile car chase at 100 mph) REDUCED to ENDANGERMENT with PROBATION and ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Mr. J. (DMC No. 11049) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2012-128671): Mr. J. and his friend had been drinking and were at a strip club celebrating his return to town. Many of the patrons began to complain that Mr. J. and his friend were “monopolizing” the dancers. They were eventually asked to leave, and they left and got in Mr. J.’s car. Prior to closing the door somebody pointed a weapon at them in order to demand money. Mr. J. then floored it and took off from out of the parking lot. Approximately 200 yards later, a large SUV got in behind Mr. J. and began chasing him. He did not realize it was a police car, until he pulled into his hotel approximately 8 miles later. He was traveling at over 100 mph at certain times. We were able to convince the Prosecutor that he was not knowingly fleeing police, and they agreed to reduce the charge to Simple Endangerment with a probation sentence and zero days in jail.
April 28, 2014
THEFT of MEANS of TRANSPORTATION with 2 PRIOR FELONIES CONVICTIONS REDUCED to a MISDEMEANOR with ZERO DAYS in JAIL at TIME of SENTENCING – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 5170) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2003-033716): Mr. W. had 2 prior felony convictions, and was accused of stealing motorcycles and “parting” them out. His original Public Defender had secured an offer to 6 years in prison. When we became involved we immediately attacked the proof of his prior convictions. This allowed us to secure a class 6 “open” offer, and we were able to argue at the time of sentencing for the charge to be reduced to a misdemeanor upon successful completion of probation. Mr. W. eventually got drug counseling, completed probation and did not serve any jail time or prison time regarding this case.
April 28, 2014
UNLAWFUL USE of MEANS of TRANSPORTATION REDUCED to MISDEMEANOR at SENTENCING with PROBATION and ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 5531) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2005-006076): Ms. B. was accused of taking her sister’s car without permission and keeping it for an extended point of time. A warrant was eventually issued for her arrest and she was picked up several years later. We were able to show that she was now drug free, was married and had a small child. Because the case was plead to a class 6 “open”, we were able to request a misdemeanor designation at sentencing. She was immediately given a misdemeanor with only 4 months of summary probation with zero days in jail. She has no felony on her record.
April 28, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 16B Unlawful Use of Means of Transportation Victories, 200 DUI / Vehicular Crime Victories, Case Victories
UNLAWFUL USE of MEANS of TRANSPORTATION NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 10683) (ASU Police Department DR2011-00007633): Police were called when several light rail patrons stated that they saw several people riding on a forklift coming up the trail near the light rail. When police arrived, they found several ASU students who had taken a forklift and were going for a “joy ride”. All were arrested for Unlawful Use of Means of Transportation. We were able to show that our client merely hopped on as a passenger, and he did not actually take the forklift. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Officer agreed to not file any charges.
April 28, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 1300 Bench Trial Victories, 1300C Partial Bench Trial Acquittal, 16J Driving on a Suspended License Victories, 200 DUI / Vehicular Crime Victories, 2A Vehicular Crimes Bench Trial Victories, Case Victories, Phoenix City Court / Phoenix Municipal Court Victories
PARTIAL ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL | DRIVING WHILE LICENSE SUSPENDED – State v. Ms. E. (DMC No. 6209) (Phoenix City Court 3415491): Ms. E. was pulled over for allegedly having a fake registration tag on her license plate. Officer’s then told her that her license was also suspended. At trial, we admitted to the fictitious license plate sticker, but fought the Driving on Suspended License allegation due to the fact that even though the notice was mailed to Ms. E. regarding a suspension, it did not actually go into effect until 3 days after the actual incident. If Ms. E. had been convicted of the suspended license charge, she would have lost her license for a year.