Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: 56 Felony Aggravated Assault Pre-Charge Victories

State v. Mr. G (DMC No. 14255) – (2 Counts) Felony Kidnapping, (10 Counts) Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (DCAC), (5 Counts) Felony Child Molestation, (2 Counts) Sex Abuse of a Minor and (10 Counts) Felony Aggravated Assault of a Minor – Not Charged – Phoenix Police Department Investigated (DR No. 20XX-XXXXXXX9); Maricopa County Attorney’s Office “Turned Down.”

Mr. G was the uncle and godfather of the alleged victim. He had not seen her in 3 years, when she reported multiple instances of Sexual Conduct and Abuse by Mr. G. She stated it started when she was 5 and ended when she was 7. She claimed that he would come into her room multiple times, hold his hand over her mouth and threaten to kill her or kill her whole family if she told anyone. He would then engage in sexual intercourse and other sexual activities with her.

Mr. G was told of these allegations by his family and he immediately contacted us. He denied all allegations and indicated that there were various issues going on between he and the rest of the family that had nothing to do with the alleged victim. He immediately stated he would be willing to do a Polygraph, which he passed regarding questions about touching the victim in any way in a sexual nature. We then prepared a letter and sent it over to the Detective handling the case. Even though he received all of these items, he still sent it to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for charges. We then spoke with the charging attorney in the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office Charging Bureau, and the case was ultimately “Turned Down.” If Mr. G were charged and convicted of all of these crimes, it could have carried a mandatory minimum of 10 consecutive life sentences, plus numerous additional years in prison. He was never charged with anything and has a clean record.

FELONY AGGRAVATED ASSAULT DANGEROUS (with Knife) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 13894) (Scottsdale Police Department DR No. 13-17308):   Mr. T lived with another man, the alleged victim in his case. One day, after a brief verbal and physical altercation the night prior, Mr.  T was served with an Order of Protection. In the Order of Protection his roommate was alleging that Mr. T had held a fork to his neck and drew blood, which would be an Aggravated Assault (Dangerous) per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1204. After being served with the order of protection, Mr. T met with our office and ultimately retained our firm for Pre-Charge services.

After being retained, the Pre-Charge team met to discuss the plan of attack in his case. The immediate plan was to (1) order a copy of the police report from the Scottsdale Police Department, and (2) send a Trebus letter to the Maricopa County Attorney’s office as a precaution. After these steps were taken, we had multiple calls with Mr. T and his father regarding the status of the order of protection and steps Mr. T was taking to remove his property from the home.  During one of these calls, Mr. T’s father advised that the alleged victim had contacted him regarding our client getting the rest of his property out of the house. After obtaining  the  telephone  number  for  the  alleged  victim  we  reached  out  to  speak  with  him regarding his side of what happened. The call was very short and ended with the alleged victim telling us to obtain a copy of the police report. Given his demeanor, the pre-charge team discussed the concern we had of potential class 3 dangerous charge coming Mr. T’s way.

Approximately a month and a half after being retained, a Detective from the Scottsdale Police Department reached out to our client and left a message requesting a call back. At this point, we returned the Detective’s call and submitted the Trebus letter, previously sent to the County Attorney’s Office. Later, we received  the  police  report  which  was  only   two  pages  long  and  indicated it was a “furthered investigation.” After multiple follow-up calls to the Scottsdale Police Department and we finally received the full police report one month later. In that report, it delineated that there was a physical  fight  between  our  client  and  his  roommate  over  using  a  fork  on  a  nonstick  pan. According to the alleged victim, our client was intoxicated. The alleged victim indicated that our client put the fork to his neck and held hot oil in the other hand as if he was going to dump it on him, however he didn’t. Our client is alleged to have said “I should kill you.” It was at this time that the alleged victim left. The report also indicates that an Order of Protection was in place and that the civil standby had occurred. The report ends with the following quote, “based on the fact that Michael T is not responding to my voice message personally and he is now represented by an attorney, I am unable to confirm the version of events described by the victim and have classified this case as inactive.”

FELONY DISRUPTION of an EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION, FELONY AGGRAVATED ASSAULT on a TEACHER and DISORDERLY CONDUCT NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 7616) (Chandler Police Department DR No. 2005-13-4523): Mr. T was an emotionally challenged student at Chandler High School who was being bullied by fellow classmates. On that particular day, there was a substitute teacher teaching the class. When Mr. T got up to leave the class and walked directly to his counselors office to report what had occurred, the substitute teacher ran outside and alerted Security that Mr. T was leaving the classroom. When Security confronted and emotionally distraught Mr. T, he had a breakdown and they grabbed him.

One of the Security Guards was bending his thumb back and stating “I will break your thumb if you don’t comply”. Mr. T was struggling with the Security Guards and he kicked his teacher. He was subsequently charged with Felony Disruption of an Educational Institution pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2911(A)(1). He was also charged with Felony Aggravated Assault on a teacher pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1204(8)(d), and Disorderly Conduct. We were able to fully explain the situation to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Officer, and the Prosecutor elected not to file any charges against Mr. T.

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT DANGEROUS (with GUN and 2 PRIOR FELONY CONVICTIONS) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. D (DMC No. 9521) (DPS DR No.2010-011410): Mr. D was traveling in the area of the I-17 and State Route 101 interchanges in Phoenix, Arizona. Another vehicle had cut him off and had engaged Mr. D in a “road rage” incident. The other vehicle pulled up to Mr. D and was attempting to force him off the road. Mr. D held up a gun to display that he was armed, but did not point it at the other vehicle. The other vehicle backed off and called Police. Mr. D was then arrested and charged with Aggravated Assault with a deadly weapon. This charge carries a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 15 years in prison. Because of this, it was important that we argued to the Detective involved in the case that this was a situation of Self Defense. We also wrote a letter detailing all of the facts of the case to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. Subsequently, everything was reviewed and the County Attorney Declined Charges against Mr. D.

DISMISSED AT BENCH TRIAL/NOT CHARGED | AGGRAVATED ASSAULT/ASSAULT – State v. Mr. J. (DMC No. 5201) (Goodyear Municipal Court CR2004-00251): Mr. J. and his wife were going through marital problems when he came home to tell her that he was filing for divorce. They reconciled and he spent the night together. As he got up in the morning, he decided that he was going to follow through with the divorce, and he went into the garage to pack his tools. There, his wife met him and began attacking him. He swung around with one of his tools and struck her in the head by accident. We were able to convince the Maricopa County Attorney not to file Aggravated Assault charges with a Deadly Weapon (which would have exposed him to 5 to 15 years in prison), and instead he was charged as a misdemeanor. We set the case to trial, and on the date of the bench trial the State was unable to proceed due to witness issues, and the case was dismissed.

NOT CHARGED | VEHICULAR HOMICIDE/VEHICULAR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 7422) (Peoria Police Department Investigated): Mr. S. was accused of exiting a private drive and striking a second vehicle that was travelling at a high rate of speed.  The passenger in the second vehicle was treated for injuries, flown to the hospital and later died.  Mr. S. was subsequently investigated for DUI due to unsteadiness on his feet and an odor of alcohol.  During the pendency of a civil lawsuit, filed by the decedent’s family, we were able to show that Mr. S. had been blocked by a fence from having a clean view of the street he was pulling onto.  In addition, we were able to show that the victim’s vehicle did not have its headlights on.  This was done by examining the filaments of the broken headlights.  Because they were not burned out, this proved that they were not actually “on” at the time of the accident.  Ultimately no criminal charges were brought against Mr. S.   He was originally facing potentially Manslaughter/Negligent Homicide charges along with Aggravated Assault Dangerous charges.  He could have spent decades in prison.


NOT CHARGED/DISMISSED | AGGRAVATED ASSAULT with a GUN (dangerous) NOT CHARGED/DISORDERLY CONDUCT with a GUN (dangerous) DISMISSED – State v. Mr. H. (DMC No. 6699) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2006-030697): Mr. H.’s wife went to the police station and stated that 3 days earlier her husband had threatened her with a gun, demanding to know who had been texting her on her phone. When police went to question Mr. H., he denied that he pointed the gun at her, and instead that he pointed it at himself and threatened to commit suicide. He was arrested for Aggravated Assault (Dangerous) with a gun. We convinced the Prosecutors charging bureau to only charge Mr. H. with the lesser of Disorderly Conduct (Dangerous) with a gun. During the pendency of the case, we presented evidence that Ms. H.’s story kept changing, and in addition, she no longer desired prosecution. Due to various other issues, the State moved to dismiss all charges in full. Originally, Mr. H. was facing 5 to 15 years for the Aggravated Assault, and 1 ½ to 3 years for the Disorderly Conduct (Dangerous). He now has nothing on his record.

NOT CHARGED | AGGRAVATED ASSAULT with BRASS KNUCKLES (dangerous) – State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 6701) (Mesa Police Department DR2005-2380646): Mr. G. and a group of other juvenile’s were in a car when they allegedly confronted another car and a mass fight broke out. Mr. G. was accused of striking a male in the back of the head with brass knuckles. He later needed to go to the hospital and received stitches. We were able to show that some of the witnesses identified the person with the brass knuckles as a Hispanic male, as whereas Mr. G. was white. We were able to convince the Prosecution to not file charges. Mr. G. could have been facing 5 to 15 years in prison.

NOT CHARGED | VEHICULAR AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (dangerous)/CRIMINAL DAMAGE – State v. Ms. M. (DMC No. 5654) (Maricopa County Booking P018038/Goodyear Police Department DR2004-00006748): Ms. M. was an 18 year old female who had psychiatric problems, and she was arguing with her mother and brother. She was taking anti-depressants, and had recently lowered the dose just before the incident. She was threatening to kill herself with a knife and the police were called. As she was leaving in her car, her mother got behind the vehicle and was struck. When the police arrived, they saw various items broken inside the house and they charged Ms. M. with “Criminal Damage” and “Vehicular Aggravated Assault” (dangerous). She was arrested and was facing 5 to 15 years on the Aggravated Assault charge alone. We were able to intervene with Prosecutor and convince them to not move forward with the charges. Ms. M. has no convictions on her record.

NOT CHARGED | AGGRAVATED ASSAULT with GUN (dangerous) – State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 704) (Phoenix Police Department DR2008-1567021): Mr. R. was driving with his young daughter when another driver engaged him in a road rage.  They began to argue and once the cars stopped at a light, the other individual got out and started to approach the daughter’s side of the vehicle.  Mr. R. retrieved his gun from a fanny pack while it was still in a holster, held it up to display it (without pointing it at the other person), and the other person then turned and left.  The alleged victim called police and claimed that the gun was pointed directly at him and that Mr. R. had initiated the confrontation.  Through interviews with various witnesses, we were able to convince the police and prosecutors to not file charges.  Mr. R. was originally facing 5 to 15 years in prison.


Call Now Button