NOT CHARGED/DISMISSED | VEHICLUAR MANSLAUGHTER /DUI DRUGS (Marijuana) – State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 10610) (Apache Junction City Court TR20120026): A motorcyclist had been involved in a minor collision at Broadway Road & Meridian Road in Apache Junction. The motorcyclist then wandered around the car as Mr. C.’s car came up and struck and killed him. Although no impairment was observed, the police ordered a blood draw from Mr. C., which revealed the presence of marijuana. We filed a Motion to Suppress the blood draw, which was granted and the DUI drugs charge was dismissed. We also were able to convince the prosecutors not to file charges for manslaughter as Mr. C. was not at fault for striking the motorcyclist. No charges for manslaughter were ever brought.
DISMISSED | POSSESSION of DRUG PARAPHERNALIA DISMISSED – State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 10663) (Scottsdale City Court CR2011-033113): Police received an anonymous call regarding a suspicious vehicle which was parked. When officers arrived, they went up to the vehicle and knocked on the window. He told them to open the door, and when they did, he saw a plastic baggy of marijuana on the drivers lap. Mr. M. was the passenger. We filed a Motion to Suppress all Evidence based upon a warrantless search, and a Miranda violation. Prior to the Evidentiary Hearing the State moved to dismiss all charges.
DISMISSED | DUI DRUGS (Marijuana) DISMISSED – State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 10106) (Gilbert City Court 2011-CT0004576): Mr. B. rear-ended another vehicle travelling less than 5 MPH at Val Vista & Elliott Roads in Gilbert. The officer contacted Mr. B. and suspected marijuana consumption. He found marijuana in Mr. B.’s vehicle and pictures of marijuana on Mr. B.’s cell phone. Ultimately, a urine sample was taken which revealed the presence of marijuana metabolites. Due to various witness issues that arose for the prosecution over the course of the case we were able to secure a complete dismissal from the Prosecutor.
DISMISSED | DUI DRUGS (Soma, Xanax) – State v. Ms. B. (DMC No. 10268) (Scottsdale City Court TR-2010007867): Ms. B. was pulled over at 116th Street & Shea for allegedly travelling at a high rate of speed and striking a curb. She was ultimately contacted and appeared to be very unsteady on her feet. She told officers that she had had surgery and was taking Soma and Xanax per her doctor’s instructions. We are also able to present evidence from her doctor that she had a thyroid condition. Ultimately we convinced the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.
DISMISSED | DUI DRUGS (Adderall) – State v. Ms T. (DMC No. 10736) (Scottsdale City Court TR2011-019886): Ms. T. was pulled over for a minor traffic violation in downtown Scottsdale. When the officers gave her a breath test, it only revealed a .028 BAC. She admitted to taking Adderall due to her ADHD. Officers then gathered a urine sample and cited Ms. T. for DUI drugs. Due to the various issues with collecting the urine, and the fact that the Scottsdale Crime Lab did not produce the urine results in a timely fashion, we were able to get all criminal charges dismissed.
DISMISSED | DUI DRUGS (Ambien, Effexor) – State v. Ms. H. (DMC No. 4808) (Tempe City Court 04-720515-2): Ms. H. was accused of stopping approximately 5 feet into a crosswalk. The officer gave her an eye test which he stated she “failed”. She refused all other field tests and asked to talk to her father who was a lawyer. Because the officer did not allow her to talk to her father, and the fact that she was on prescription medications for Ambien and Effexor, we were able to convince the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.
DISMISSED | DUI DRUGS (Cocaine & Marijuana) DISMISSED – State v. Mr. N. (DMC No. 10803) (Seligman Justice Court TR201201163): Mr. N. was stopped on Interstate 40 at mile post 124 by a DPS Officer for allegedly tailgating. Subsequently, a DUI investigation was ensued in which blood was drawn from Mr. N. The State alleged that it showed the presence of cocaine and marijuana metabolites. Because it had taken the lab so long to produce the results, and the prosecutor waited to charge Mr. N. for over 1 year, we were able to get the case dismissed for a violation of the statute of limitations.
DISMISSED | DUI DRUGS (Marijuana) – State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 10455) (Scottsdale City Court TR-2011028359): Mr. M. was at an intersection in 3rd Avenue & Craftsman Court in Scottsdale, where he stopped his vehicle to let off passengers. He was stopped for blocking the intersection. Subsequently, a DUI investigation ensued and the officer stated he saw a “green film” on Mr. M.’s tongue and accused him of smoking marijuana. Ultimately, a Drug Recognition Evaluation (DRE) was conducted and urine was collected. After a 3 month fight with the Scottsdale City Prosecutors Office, urine results came back negative for any marijuana. The DUI’s were dismissed summarily. We then lobbied for the Scottsdale City Prosecutors Office to look into the officer’s behavior.
DISMISSED | Production and Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 9914) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. CR 2009-006670): Mr. R. had gotten into an argument with his girlfriend when the police were called. When they arrived, the girlfriend’s mother told the police that Mr. R had been growing Marijuana in the shed, and had been selling Marijuana along with some Methamphetamine. The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office waited almost 2 years to charge Mr. R., and in that time they had lost the video tape detailing the alleged crime scene. We then filed a Willets –a motion which would have greatly hurt the State’s case. The State was then forced to file a motion to dismiss all charges.
If you have a case and would like to speak with an Arizona Criminal Lawyer, click here.
DISMISSED | Illegal Sale of Prescription Drugs, State v. Mr. A. (DMC No.7256) (Maricopa County Superior Court No. JV 544825): Mr. A. was a 15 year old high school student who took Zanax to school to sell to other kids. He was subsequently arrested and charged with Possession of Narcotic Drugs for Sale. We were able to convince the prosecutors to keep the case in Juvenile Court, rather than routing it do adult court, where Mr. A. would have potentially faced years in prison. We were able to show that because of his youth and immaturity, this case should be dismissed in its entirety. In exchange for a 3 page essay to be given to the judge, we were able to have all charges dismissed.