Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: 57 Disorderly Conduct/Threats Dismissed

ASSAULT, CRIMINAL DAMAGE and DISORDERLY CONDUCT DISMISSED at BENCH TRIAL – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 12027) (Scottsdale City Court 2013-030918): Mr. T was a professional athlete who had played running back for the Arizona Cardinals. Police were called to his house by his then live-in girlfriend regarding a “domestic violence.” They had been arguing about personal matters and had “broken up” earlier that day. Mr. T had departed and then returned to the house with a plane ticket for his girlfriend to fly to New York (as a parting gift).

At that time, she walked into the bathroom and began smashing items on the ground. These items include of various perfumes and some picture frames. Mr. T held her in order to keep her from damaging any more property. She subsequently received a minor injury and then called Police.

When Police arrived, they observed various broken items and ultimately charged Mr. T with Assault, per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1203, Criminal Damage per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1602, and Disorderly Conduct per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2904. Pursuant to policy, he was arrested and taken to Jail at that time. His young daughter was also in the household and was taken away by CPS. I received a call from Mr. T’s sports agent immediately after Mr. T had been released on his own recognizance. I then met with Mr. T at his house, toured the alleged crime scene and went over the facts of the case. After we interviewed both Officers involved and the CPS Specialist who met with the child at the Family Advocacy Center, we then began to attempt to have the charges dismissed by the Scottsdale City Prosecutors Office. The case was eventually set to Trial, and on the day of Trial, the State dismissed all charges.

PREVENTION of the USE of a TELEPHONE in an EMERGENCY, DISORDERLY CONDUCT and (2 Counts) ASSAULT DISMISSED at BENCH TRIAL – State v. Mr. A (DMC No. 7952) (Scottsdale City Court CR2007-032630): Police had received a 911 call in which the person calling hung up the phone and did not speak, when they arrived at the location to conduct a “Welfare Check”, they contacted Mr. A’s wife. She said that she had called Police and had been arguing with her husband, and that she had been pushed down on the couch and that he had hung up the phone. Mr. A was then charged with Prevention of the Use of a Telephone in an Emergency per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2915(A)(3). He was also charged with 2 Counts of Assault and Disorderly Conduct. We argued that it was his wife who choose to hang up the phone, and that she had actually attacked Mr. A first. When it came time for a Bench Trial against Mr. A, the Prosecutor choose to dismiss the charges against him.

PREVENTION of the USE of a TELEPHONE in CASE of EMERGENCY, ASSAULT and DISORDERLY CONDUCT DISMISSED at BENCH TRIAL – State v. Mr. C (DMC No. 8204) (Apache Junction Justice Court DV2007-0291): Mr. C and his girlfriend were engaged in an argument when he was accused of slapping her on her buttocks in a hard manner. His girlfriend called Police, and then the phone was grabbed out of her hand and hung up. When Police arrived, they arrested Mr. C and charged him with Prevention of the Use of a Telephone in a Case of Emergency pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2915 (A)(3). He was also charged with Assault and Disorderly Conduct. We argued that he was not the one who grabbed the phone and hung up, but in fact it was his girlfriend who hung up the phone. There were also issues about Mr. C defending himself against his girlfriend’s attacks. When it came time for the Bench Trial, the Prosecutor choose to dismiss all charges against Mr. C.

ENDANGERMENT/ASSAULT and THREATS DISMISSED – State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9812) (Scottsdale City Court CR2010-030292): Mr. C. was travelling in the back of a cab with another passenger when he lit a bank receipt on fire and held it within a foot from the cab driver’s head and the roof of the cab.  The officer was directly behind the cab and witnessed the entire incident.  He pulled Mr. C. over, and charged him with endangerment, assault and threats.  After interviewing all of the witness and the cab driver, we were able to convince the Prosecutor that nobody was actually endangered, assaulted or threatened.  The Prosecutor agreed to dismiss all charges in exchange for Mr. C. taking alcohol abuse classes.

PARTIAL ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL | ASSAULT/DISORDERLY CONDUCT – State v. Mr. J. (DMC No. 6588) (Gilbert City Court 2006-CR0000019-MI): Mr. J. was in a custody dispute with his child’s mother, when he went over to her parent’s house to pick up the child. An argument ensued, and while he was holding the child he was repeatedly struck in the face by the mother. After he left, he was arrested and cited for being the aggressor. At trial, we could show that he did not commit an assault, nor was there disorderly conduct as to his ex-wife. He was found guilty only on a non-domestic violence disorderly conduct regarding the mother’s parents.

PROBATION VIOLATION (Disorderly Conduct) DISMISSED- State v. Mr. G (DMC No. 6918) (Avondale City Court CR2006-00691): Mr. G had been convicted of Disorderly Conduct and was ordered to be placed on Probation in complete anger management classes and absconded from Probation. He was subsequently arrested and charged with a new crime, and with a Probation Violation. We were able to have Mr. G re-enrolled in classes and the Probation Violation was Dismissed.

DISMISSED | FALSE REPORTING/DISORDERLY CONDUCT and MISCONDUCT with a WEAPON (gun) – State v. Mr. F. (DMC No. 7859) (Maricopa/Stanfield Justice Court CR08-408): Mr. F. has previously been in an argument with his neighbor, when he went into the garage in order to clean his guns. The neighbor called Mr. F. over to talk about the previous incident. Mr. F. came over with a gun strapped to his back and one sticking out of his pocket. The neighbor said he felt uncomfortable, and Mr. F. put the rifle back in his garage but left the gun in his pocket. The police pulled up (because the neighbor’s wife mistakenly had called them thinking there was a problem) and Mr. F. put the gun in the bed of his pickup truck. When questioned about having a gun “on him” Mr. F. said that he did not. The officers then arrested him for False Reporting (because the gun was near him in the bed of the truck), Disorderly Conduct Dangerous and Misconduct With a Weapon. We were able to show the real story to the Prosecutor, and they agreed to dismiss all charges in exchange for 24 hours of community service. Mr. F. was originally looking at a minimum of 1 ½ years in prison if convicted.

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.

REDUCED/DISMISSED | ASSAULT REDUCED to DISORDERLY CONDUCT/DISORDERLY CONDUCT then DISMISSED with “diversion” – State v. Ms. Q. (DMC No.6120) (Peoria City Court CR2005-000976): Ms. Q. had gotten into an altercation with her ex-husband’s new wife. They were arguing and fighting over the 17 year old daughter who had split custody. She was subsequently charged with assault and we were able to show it was a mutual combat scenario. The charges were reduced from assault to disorderly conduct. We were then able to convince the Prosecutor to allow Ms. Q. to take classes in order to have the case dismissed per “diversion”. She had no conviction on her record.

PARTIAL AQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL | THREATS – State v. Mr. E. (DMC No. 5425) (Payson City Court 2005CR12005): Mr. E. was charged with several counts of threats involving his wife.  His wife stated that she had told him she was leaving him and taking his daughter when he allegedly threatened her with a gun.  He went and picked up his daughter from a neighbors house, and left.  It was also alleged he had made threats at the neighbor’s house.  At trial, we received a partial acquittal with a “not guilty” regarding the threats of gun usage at his home with his wife.

 

Call Now Button