Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: 22 Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct With Minor Dismissals

State v. Mr. S (DMC NO. 14464) – Juvenile Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor – Dismissed Pre-Adjudication, with Prejudice – Maricopa County Superior Court, Juvenile Division (Case No. JV601278).

Mr. L was a 17-year old boy enrolled at Queen Creek High School who was dating a 15-year old girl. While traveling home on the school bus, she had oral sex with him. Approximately, 3 months later, after they had broken up, she made an allegation that she was forced to do this. In the past, this girl had accused two other boys and had them both arrested for sexual acts. Mr. L. was ultimately taken into custody and arrested for Sexual Assault.

We became involved in the case and we were able to show that this girl was suicidal, bi-polar and had behavioral disorders. In addition, she was dating a new boyfriend who pushed the agenda to have Mr. L charged with a crime. We also presented evidence to the Prosecutor that Mr. L was on an IEP (Individualized Developmental Program) and was developmentally delayed.

The Juvenile Prosecutor informed us that she was going to instead charge Mr. L with Sexual Conduct with a Minor instead of Sexual Assault. We got her to agree that if Mr. L. did some classes prior to the first court date, she would Dismiss the case with prejudice in a “Pre-Adjudication” status. Mr. L did all the counseling that was required of him through the Banner Health System. When we arrived at court, the case was Dismissed with prejudice. Mr. L then turned 18 and he has no criminal record whatsoever.  Originally, he was facing prison time up until his 18th birthday, or potentially being charged as an adult, which would expose him to well over a decade of prison time.

(2 Counts) Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (DCAC) and Felony Child Molestation (DCAC) Dismissed – State v. Mr. H (DMC No. 14557) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2016-153068):  Mr. H was married to a woman who had a 14 year old daughter.  He and the alleged victim had fallen asleep on a couch and when he woke up and found that she had her hand on his crotch.  He immediately brought this to the mother’s attention and they became concerned that his step-daughter was overly sexualized. Later, they learned that she had been having sex with her boyfriend.

At the point they found out that the step-daughter was having sex, they transferred her to a different high school. She became very upset and got into a physical altercation with her mother.  She then reported the incident on the couch to her school, but she had now claimed that it was her step-dad who was touching her.  Mr. H was immediately arrested and put in jail.  We became involved and had him released on a low bond.  As we were investigating the case, we secured a private investigator to interview all parties involved.  When the step-daughter had broken up with her boyfriend, information was received from him indicating that she had lied.  Eventually, she admitted that she had lied and she had written a letter to both her mom and step-father admitting she had lied.  This was provided to the Police and the Prosecutor, and all charges were dropped.  If Mr. H would have been convicted on all 3 counts, he would have spent a minimum of 36 years in prison.

Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (Dangerous Crimes Against Children) Dismissed – State v. Ms. G (DMC No. 11932) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2013-440483): Ms. G was 25 years old with a very low cognitive function.  Her mental level was that of a 7 year old child.  She lived with her sister (her guardian) and her sister’s domestic partner and their children.  There had been previous incidents with the domestic partner’s children in which Ms. G was a victim of sexual conduct.  However, in this particular case, a male child under the age of 15 went into Ms. G’s bedroom and had sex with her.  Because Ms. G stated to the police officers that she knew “sex was wrong” she was immediately arrested and held for 2 weeks without bail.

We became involved in the case and immediately had the judge order a Rule 11 evaluation to determine if she could be “competent” to be prosecuted (see: “what is Rule 11).  She was taken out of custody and evaluated at a facility that determined she was, in fact, “incompetent and non-restorable”.  Other experts agreed, and the Judge Dismissed all charges based upon Incompetency.  If Ms. G had been ruled as “Competent”, she would have faced a minimum of 20 years in prison.

Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor, (3 Counts) Felony Sexual Assault & (2 Counts) Felony Sex Abuse DismissedState v. Mr. B (DMC No. 11308) (Casa Grande Justice Court/Pinal County Superior Court IA-2011-133): Mr. B had been living with his girlfriend for some time and they had been having relationship issues. Also in the household was his girlfriend’s 12 year old niece.  Both had been drinking one night and engaged a loud argument about breaking up. Thereafter, his girlfriend claimed that the 12 year old niece had stated that Mr. B had come into her bedroom and committed sexual conduct with her.  She said that this first occurred when she was 11 years old and had been going on for the past year.

Police arrived and arrested Mr. B and he was charged with Sexual Conduct with a Minor, along with 3 counts of Sexual Assault and 2 counts of Sexual Abuse.  We were quickly engaged and were able to get him released from custody at start of the case. We then immediately contacted the Detective and the Prosecutor began providing them with information about Mr. B’s ex girlfriend. In addition, we provided them with a polygraph that showed Mr. B was being truthful when he stated he never engaged in any sexual contact with the minor.  As the Detectives’ investigation went further into the case, both the Detective and the Prosecutor agreed to Dismiss the charges and not bring them back up for re-filing.  If Mr. B had been convicted of all of the charges, he would have spent the rest of his life in prison, due to the fact that these crimes were Dangerous Crimes Against Children (DCAC).

DISMISSED | CHILD MOLESTATION (DCAC), SEX ABUSE (DCAC) and FELONY INDECENT EXPOSURE – State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9750) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2010-006442): Mr. C. was a 61 year old man who lived across the street from a family who had a 6 year old daughter. He would often babysit the 6 year old daughter, who had emotional problems. She would often take off her clothes and dance naked in his living room and he would have to tell her to stop and immediately take her home to her mother. She would also walk into his bathroom when he would be urinating and try and look at his exposed penis. The girl’s father (who did not live with her or the mother) heard accusations from his daughter that she had been touched by Mr. C. He immediately contacted the Goodyear Police Department and an investigation was conducted on Mr. C.

We became involved and allowed him to be polygraph and voice stress analyzed by the Goodyear Police Department. Although his results were “truthful” on the tests, they still felt he was not telling the truth. Approximately 3 years later, Mr. C. was indicted and charged (long after he thought this issue was closed). His charges included Child Molestation under ARS 13-1410; Sex Abuse under ARS 13-1404; and Felony Indecent Exposure under ARS 13-1402. During our investigation we exposed many flaws in the Detective’s reports, and some out right falsities attributing statements to Mr. C.’s adult children. We also filed a motion to have the Grand Jury indictment remanded based upon these flaws. Just prior to the date of trial, the Deputy Maricopa County Attorney in charge of the case filed a Motion to Dismiss all charges. Originally, Mr. C. would have spent the rest of his life in prison if he were convicted of these charges.

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.

Call Now Button