December 27, 2018

December 27, 2018 By dmcantor 114 Theft and Fraud Pre-Charge Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 47K Issuing Bad Checks Victories, 47O Identity Theft Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories, Pinal County Superior Court Victories

State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 14202)

Felony Issuing Bad Checks ($5,000) Felony Identify Theft & Felony Forgery Not Charged – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 14202) (Pinal County Sheriff’s Office DR14-0130179): Mr. T worked for a well known national bank as a teller. After his last day on the job, he was contacted by the fraud department claiming he had written multiple checks from different businesses totaling $5,000. He immediately retained our services and we contacted the banks fraud department. We also contacted the lead detective of the Pinal County Sherriff’s Office.

We then prepared a Trebus letter, which we sent to the Pinal County Attorney’s Office should they proceed by way of Grand Jury. We requested that our client would like to make a statement, and the Grand Jury be told this, in fact, was going to happen. After presenting our objections to the bank and to the Detective, the Detective requested more information from the bank. The bank’s Investigator could not provide further information or handwriting samples which would support their claim. No charges were brought against Mr. T.

December 27, 2018

December 27, 2018 By dmcantor 300 Sex Crime Victories, 38A Failure to Register as a Sex Offender Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 47 Miscellaneous Theft/Fraud Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 47O Identity Theft Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v Mr. M (DMC No. 11311)

(8 Counts) Felony Identity Theft, (4 Counts) Felony Failure to Register as a Sex Offender, (8 Counts) Felony Forgery & (4 Counts) Felony Presentment of False Instrument for Filing Reduced to Probation and Zero Days in Jail – State v Mr. M (DMC No. 11311) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2012-006755): In 1972, Mr. M was 17 years old and ran away from home from Florida to California, where he assumed a different name. He went and got his social security card when he got his first job and always left it under the assumed name. He was later convicted of multiple misdemeanor sex crimes in the Phoenix City Court, and was required to Register as a Sex Offender per Arizona Revised Statue ARS 13-3821. He had done so for years under the pseudonym.

In 2011, he changed his name back to his birth name. This was done with the assistance of an “enumeration expert” with the Sex Offender Registry. She had told him he could change his name as long as he never went back to using his fake name, and she did not inform him that he had to re-register the new name within 72 hours of the change. Later, Mr. M was on unemployment and was collecting benefits under his old name. He ultimately was arrested and charged with multiple counts of Forgery based on the Sex Offender Registration forms that he originally signed, and based on his employment verifications he signed on jobs he had worked at throughout the years. He was also charged with Taking the Identity of another, Presentment of False Instruments and Failure to Register as a Sex Offender during the course of various moves during his lifetime. We were able to show the Prosecutor that throughout the course of Mr. M lifetime he had never committed any other types of sex crimes (over the previous 50 years). In addition, he had always paid taxes and tried to comply with the law. Although he was facing the rest of his life in prison if he were tried and convicted on all charges, we were able to secure a deal to Probation with zero days in jail.

March 12, 2018

March 12, 2018 By dmcantor 114 Theft and Fraud Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. M (DMC No. 14209)

FELONY FORGERY NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. M (DMC No. 14209) (Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office Search Warrant No. 2014-000001): Mr. M’s mother rented a guest home that was located on her property. After the tenant of this guest home passed away, police began investigating suspicious signatures made on checks purported to be signed by the tenant that postdated the tenant’s death. They initially contacted Mr. M’s mother to obtain handwriting exemplars. After obtaining that, they contacted Mr. M indicating they want handwriting exemplars from him as well regarding potential Forgery allegations per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2002. After being contacted by police, Mr. M contacted our office. Once our services were retained, I met with the Pre-Charge team and decided the actions that would be taken including contacting the Detective, submitting a Trebus letter to the Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, and having our client submit to a polygraph examination.

Immediately upon being retained, we reached out to the Detective. The Detective indicated she had a warrant to obtain our client’s handwriting exemplars. We arranged a time for Mr. M to meet at the police department to provide the samples. That same day, we scheduled a polygraph examination for our client, however, that polygraph examination was never completed. We then accompanied Mr. M to the police department for the execution of the handwriting exemplar search warrant. During that meeting we obtained the name of the County Attorney who was involved. Approximately two weeks later we prepared and submitted a detailed Trebus/Bashir letter to the Yavapai County Attorney’s Office and the Detective. Later, we spoke with the Detective, who indicated the exemplars came back showing he was the writer of the checks. She indicated she was submitting charges for Forgery and Fraudulent Schemes. The Detective refused to issue a summons, however she agreed to a self-surrender date. We accompanied our client to the self-surrender and obtained an Own Recognizance release. Despite the Detective requesting that our client be charged with the crime, the Yavapai County Attorney’s Office, likely based on the information presented in our Trebus/Bashir letter, declined to file prosecution.

March 9, 2018

March 9, 2018 By dmcantor 114 Theft and Fraud Pre-Charge Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 13832)

FELONY FORGERY NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 13832) (Chandler Police Department and Scottsdale Police Department Investigated): The investigations in this matter began because Mr. S was a 47-year-old man who was at the tail end of a bitter and contentious divorce with his wife of 10 years. During the divorce, the wife contacted both the Chandler Police Department and the Scottsdale Police Department to make allegations of Forgery per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2002 against her ex-husband. Specifically, the wife alleged that Mr. S had forged her name, and a notarization of her name, on a deed to a piece of property in another state. She further claimed that Mr. S had obtained approximately $250,000 for the sale of the property after forging her signature. The wife had done a fair amount of research including digging up documentation in the other state and contacting the individual in Maricopa County who was shown as the notary public on the documents. She further spoke with the Notary Public and advised him that if he did not file a police report that he might be viewed as complicit in the Forgery in some manner. That individual filed yet another police report with the Scottsdale Police Department. A necessary part of the claim by her was that the property was community property and she was therefore being defrauded of her rightful property by her ex-husband.

The Scottsdale and Chandler Detectives conducted investigations which they reviewed documentation and contacted two different notary agents. They then tried to contact Mr. S by phone unsuccessfully. They were advised by the wife that Mr. S was going to have a supervised visitation with his children and they made arrangements to be there and confront him at that time. The Chandler Detectives then confronted Mr. S at his scheduled visitation time and questioned him about the case. Mr. S was questioned prior to receiving his Miranda warnings and gave answers that were not inculpatory, but did not satisfy Detectives. They subsequently arrested Mr. S and took him into custody for further questioning. After advising Mr. S, of his Miranda warnings Mr. S refused to make any other statements. Both police departments then referred the case to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to file Forgery charges.

Upon being retained, our Pre-Charge team took several steps. After consulting about the case, we immediately sent a letter to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office advising that we represented Mr. S and that if charges were submitted to the grand jury, Mr. S requested that they be advised that he wished to appear and testify. We also reached out to the police and made initial contact so they know that we represented Mr. S for all future purposes. We requested copies of the various reports from the two different agencies.

Our research of the case revealed that we had certain strengths and weaknesses. First, there appeared to be documents that had clearly been forged or altered once they were notarized. Those documents had then been filed with the recorder in another state to memorialize a land sale. Second, the only logical beneficiary of such Forgery was in fact our client. However, it appeared that the wife had made statements that were either untruthful or inaccurate to the police with regards to the property. She had indicated to the police that the land was community property. In fact, the land appear to have always been Mr. S’s sole and personal property, as it was acquired as an inheritance. In the ongoing divorce proceedings, the civil court had confirmed that fact by awarding that land to Mr. S as his sole and separate property. This led to the next issue, which were the elements needed for Forgery. Specifically Forgery requires an intent to defraud another person. We were then able to draft letter to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office providing them with a copy of the decree of dissolution of marriage, which we were able to verify that the land was Mr. S’s sole and separate property.

In our letter, we advised the County Attorney that this information should be provided to a grand jury, should a grand jury be reviewing the case. We were subsequently able to confirm through the police departments, as well as to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, that charges had been “turned down.” We were also advised that our information was instrumental in obtaining this result.

August 13, 2015

August 13, 2015 By dmcantor 114 Theft and Fraud Pre-Charge Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 43A Fraudulent Schemes Pre-Charge Victories, 47A Mortgage Fraud Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. D (DMC No. 8662)

NOT CHARGED | FRADULENT SCHEMES/MORTGAGE FRAUD ($289,000) FORGERY – State v. Mr. D. (DMC No. 8662) (Private Law Firm Investigated): Mr. D. owned an investment company and had Power of Attorney for a client that he had been friends with for approximately 7 years. The client was out of the country and had Mr. D. sign off for the client on various home loan documents. Unfortunately, Mr. D. signed the client’s name itself, instead of signing his name as Power of Attorney. When the housing market turned, the client attempted to back out of all his loans by claiming that he had no knowledge that Mr. D. had signed the documents on his behalf (even though his wife and children all lived inside the house). A private law firm became involved and threatened ligation and criminal prosecution. We were able to point out that the alleged victim’s claims were ridiculous because he lived in the house and would have obviously known that financial documents would have been signed and that a transaction took place. Even though the house went into foreclosure and there was over $289,000 in loses, no criminal prosecution was brought and all civil lawsuits were shut down.

August 12, 2015

August 12, 2015 By dmcantor 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced, 47 Miscellaneous Theft/Fraud Victories, 47B Racketeering (RICO) / Illegally Conducting an Enterprise (State Charge) Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 47O Identity Theft Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v. Ms. D (DMC No. 8354)

ILLEGALLY CONDUCTING an ENTERPRISE/RICO ($251,000), FRAUDULENT SCHEMES, PARTICIPATING in a CRIMINAL SYNDICATE, (20 COUNTS) FORGERY, (9 COUNTS) IDENTITY THEFT & (14 COUNTS) FRAUDULENT PREPARATION of TAX RETURNS REDUCED to 1 COUNT of POSSESSION of a FORGERY DEVICE (Class 6 Open/Misdemeanor) with PROBATION and ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Ms. D (DMC No. 8354) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2007-008286): Ms. D’s father owned a tax preparation business that she worked for. Her father and his wife would meet numerous clients and sign them up for tax services. It appeared that her father was receiving falsified Social Security cards and other false documents in order to file fraudulent tax returns. After their returns were prepared, Ms. D’s father would ask her to sign his signature on the returns themselves. This resulted in over $1,000,000 of loss in tax revenue.

Although Ms. D and both her parents were indicted along with other co-conspirators, she had no direct information that these were fraudulent returns. Through Forensic Accounting, hand writing experts and numerous interviews we were able to show that she was an innocent pawn in the fraudulent scheme. Her father ended up being sentenced to prison, and Ms. D had all 46 counts reduced to a single count of Possessing a Forgery Device (i.e. holding a pen that signed her father’s names to the returns) in exchange for Probation with no jail. When she completed probation, that one charge was converted to a Misdemeanor. Ms. D has no felony on her record.

August 11, 2015

August 11, 2015 By dmcantor 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced, 47J Forgery Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v. Ms. J (DMC No. 7525)

REDUCED | ATTEMPTED FRAUDULENT SCHEMES ($238,000) and FORGERY (with prior convictions) REDUCED to IDENTITY THEFT with PROBATION and ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Ms. J. (DMC No. 7525) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2005-122006): Ms. J. had walked into a financial institution and ordered a secure mortgage loan. She provided documentation claiming to be her own daughter. She then secured the loan in the amount of $238,000 which was levered against her daughter’s home. When this was discovered, she was promptly charged with Mortgage Fraud, Attempted Fraud Schemes and Forgery. Because Ms. J. had a history of mental problems, we were able to disclose numerous medical records to the Maricopa County Attorney. They agreed to reduce the case down to a simple Identification Theft with probation and zero days in jail. Ms. J. was also ordered to receive mental health counseling. She was originally facing years in prison, but instead received counseling and treatment.

August 8, 2015

August 8, 2015 By dmcantor 114 Theft and Fraud Pre-Charge Victories, 115 Assault/Violent Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 43A Fraudulent Schemes Pre-Charge Victories, 46 Theft Pre-Charge Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 47N Embezzlement Victories, 500 Assault / Violent Crime Victories, 66 Child/Vulnerable Adult Abuse Dismissals, 66-68 Child/Vulnerable Adult Abuse Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Ms. A (DMC No. 9212)

EMBEZZLEMENT/FRAUDULENT SCHEMES ($120,000), MONEY LAUNDERING, THEFT, FORGERY and VULNERABLE ADULT ABUSE all NOT CHARGED –State v. Ms. A (DMC No. 9212) (Apache Junction Police Department DR No. 090819003/Pinal County Attorney’s Office Investigated): Ms. A had become the care taker of a 93 year old woman for the last 8 years of her life. While she was working for the woman, she was given a car, and was also authorized to write checks for a total of $120,000 to herself. In addition, the woman had transferred title of her house to Ms. A’s name. Approximately 1 year after she had passed away, the relatives began looking in to all of the woman’s finances and found out that she had dementia. They claim that Ms. A had taken advantage of a Vulnerable Adult and had stolen all of her possessions.

When Apache Junction Police Department became involved, we immediately had Ms. A take a polygraph test. She passed with flying colors. We ultimately secured an agreement that the title of the house would be transferred back into the relatives’ names, and that the relatives would not be challenging the $120,000 or car that Ms. A had received as compensation for 7 years of care giver services. Ultimately, the Pinal County Attorney’s Office turned down all charges.

July 2, 2015

July 2, 2015 By dmcantor 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, 47O Identity Theft Victories, 47Q Trafficking in Stolen Goods Victories, Case Victories

State v. Ms. A (DMC No. 9789)

TRAFFICKING and STOLEN PROPERTY ($1,200), IDENTITY THEFT and FORGERY REDUCED to PROBATION with 60 DAYS of DEFERRED JAIL– State v. Ms. A (DMC No. 9789) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2010-123488): Ms. A had been living with her boyfriend when she stole his gun and sold it to a local pawn shop. When she did this, she used a stolen driver’s license and posed as a different female. Ultimately, the boyfriend reported the gun stolen, and it was traced back to the person whose identity was stolen. This person informed police that her license had been stolen, and they pulled up a videotaped in the pawn shop. The victim immediately recognized Ms. A, and she was charged with Identity Theft, Trafficking and Stolen Property and Forgery. We were able to have all charges reduced to Probation with 60 days of “Deferred” jail. Because she performed well on Probation, the jail was ultimately Deleted, and she did not spend any time in custody.

July 2, 2015

July 2, 2015 By dmcantor 2100 Superior Court Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 43 Fraudulent Schemes Reduced, 45 Theft Reduced, 47A Mortgage Fraud Victories, 47J Forgery Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v. Mr. M (DMC No. 6028)

REDUCED | 8 COUNTS of FRAUD SCHEMES and MORTGAGE FRAUD/5 COUNTS of ID THEFT/7 COUNTS of FORGERY and 1 COUNT of THEFT REDUCED to a SINGLE COUNT of FORGERY with PROBATION and 60 DAYS JAIL – State v. Mr. M. (DMC No. 6028) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2005-011595): Mr. M. was being accused of being involved in fraudulent real estate loans that included “straw buyers” which resulted in $1.5 million of fraudulent loans. We were able to show that Mr. M. did not know that the loans were to straw buyers, and that he did not receive any kickbacks from the co-defendants. The only thing Mr. M. was guilty of was a single count of forgery. Although he was facing decades in prison, we were able to get the case reduced to a simple probation with 60 days in jail. The co-defendants were not as lucky.

Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page

Our Location

Free Consultation