Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: 26-27 Luring a Minor Victories

State v. Mr. D (DMC No. 14909) – Felony Custodial Interference, Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor, Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation, and Felony Sending Obscene Internet Materials to a Minor – Reduced to Probation With 90 Days of Jail – Yuma County Superior Court (Case No. CR2017-00299): Mr. R was a school teacher at the local high school and he was 32 years of age. He befriended a 17-year-old student at the high school while he was the sponsor of the chess team. She was constantly with Mr. R, and eventually she went on a three-day vacation with him to an out-of-state location. The student eventually told her friend that there had been some fondling, digital penetration and exchange of some lewd photographs via the Internet. The girl’s friend told the other girl’s boyfriend, and teachers were notified.
Mr. R was ultimately charged with Felony Custodial Interference for taking the minor out of state. He was also charged with Felony Luring a Minor for Sex Exploitation when he requested photographs from her on the Internet. Lastly, he was charged with Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor and also charged for sending obscene Internet materials to her. If he were to be convicted of all charges and sentenced to the maximum, he could have spent well over a decade in prison. Ultimately, the case was handled by a local Yuma attorney along with our Firm, and was reduced to Probation with 90 days in Jail and Sex Offender Registration.

State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 14796) – Felony Sexual Exploitation of a Minor/Child Pornography (DCAC), Felony Aggravated Luring of a Minor for Sexual Exploitation (DCAC) and Felony Transmitting Obscene Materials to a Minor – Dismissed – Surprise Police Department Investigated (SW14-0802800) and Maricopa County Superior Court (Case No. PF2015-138656).

Mr. S was a 29-year old financial advisor who was licensed by FINRA. He was alleged to have started an online conversation of a sexual nature with his wife’s friend’s daughter who was 14. The allegations were that he solicited naked photographs from her and she sent five pictures to him. In addition, allegations were made that there were three naked videos of them that were sent back and forth. Ultimately, the girl entered a psychiatric hospital because she was suicidal. She was also a “cutter” and she claimed she had been raped by her cousin. The Surprise Police Department then executed a Search Warrant, seized all of Mr. S’s computers and arrested him.

We became involved in the case immediately after Mr. S was released from custody. While the forensic analysis of the computers and iPhones were pending, we handled the case for 11 months and gathered evidence to show that the girl had a history of lying and making things up. Ultimately, Detectives phoned and said they would be arresting Mr. S, and we arranged a self-surrender at the Surprise Police Department. Once he was taken into custody, we then handled the Initial Appearance. We successfully argued to the Judge that there was no Probable Cause for the Aggravated Luring charge, or the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor charge, due to the fact that the photographs and videos never showed any faces, and it was impossible to determine whether the ages were below 18-years of age. However, Probable Cause was found for 1 Count of Furnishing Obscene Materials to a Minor.

Next, we contacted the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and spoke with the Deputy County Attorney handling the case. We informed her that the problems on the other two cases also applied to the remaining charge. Ultimately, she agreed with us and she “turned down” the case for prosecution. All charges were ultimately Dismissed, and the Surprise Detectives were not happy about this. After these charges were Dismissed, somebody purporting to be the alleged victim contacted Mr. S on social media in order to gain “closure.” We suspected that this was Undercover Detectives attempting to secure some type of admission from Mr. S. No admissions were ever made, and no charges were ever brought against Mr. S.

Originally, he was facing potentially over three decades in prison if he were to be convicted on all three charges run consecutively. He has no criminal record and has preserved his FINRA license.

Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Purposes and (2 Counts) Felony Sex Conduct with a Minor Reduced to Child Abuse with Probation, Zero Days in Jail and No Sex OffenderRegistration – State v Mr. A (DMC No. 14559) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2016-002795):  Mr. A was 37 years old, and he began a relationship with a young lady who he thought was over 18 years of age.  They and an ongoing relationship in which they had sexual intercourse on several occasions.  He found out she was actually 17 years old before the final time that they had sex.  They also engaged in texting back and forth where he solicited her to come over to his house and have sex after he found out she was 17.

The girl’s mother was later killed and during an investigation by Police, they analyzed her cell phone and found the conversations between her and Mr. A.  Subsequently, an investigation ensued into Mr. A regarding Luring of a Minor for Sexual Purposes and Sexual Misconduct with a Minor.  He was ultimately arrested and charged with those crimes.

We then became involved and began investigating the case.  We were able to show the Prosecutor that she did tell him she was “19, almost 20” when they originally met.  We were also able to present evidence showing that Mr. A was not a predator for underage girls.  Ultimately, the Prosecutor agreed to amend all charges down to a Child Abuse which included Probation and Zero Jail.  In addition, the Judge agreed that there would be no Sex Offender Registration requirement for Mr. A.  This has allowed him to remain a free man and have gainful employment.

(5 Counts) Felony Aggravating Luring of a Minor for Sexual Purposes (DCAC) Reduced to Probation with Zero Days in Jail – State v. Mr. O (DMC No. 14558) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2016-132085):  Mr. O was on Craig’s List, when he contacted what he believed to be an Escort who was over the age of 18.  This turned out to be an Undercover Officer posing as a 14 year old.  During the course of conversations via text, the undercover informed Mr. O that she was 14.  She then requested various photographs of his penis.  Texting commenced to go back and forth between the Undercover Officer and Mr. O, and Mr. O sent photos and videos of himself masturbating.

The Undercover Officer, who was on the KIK account, attempted many times to have Mr. O come to a specific location.  He never did, and eventually a Search Warrant was executed at Mr. O’s house and he was arrested.  He was subsequently charged with 5 different counts of Aggravated Luring of a Minor pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-3560.  It was aggravated because there were more than 2 offenses committed over various time spans.  This subjected Mr. O to potentially serving a large amount of time in prison.

Because Mr. O was compelled to give his iPhone password to the Detective, we were able to argue that under Bumper v North Carolina and State v Valenzuela, that this search procedure wasn’t properly done.  We threatened to file a Motion to Suppress all evidence based upon those cases. Ultimately, the State offered Mr. O a plea that was reduced to Probation with Zero Days in Jail.

Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Purposes, Felony Sexual Exploitation of a Minor/Child Pornography, & Felony Furnishing Harmful or Obscene Materials to a Minor Not Charged – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 13971) (South Carolina Sheriff’s Office Investigated):  Mr. T was on the website “Plenty of Fish” and had conversations with numerous women who were 18 years of age and older.  He received a call from somebody purporting to be a Deputy from the South Carolina Sherriff’s Office claiming that he had gotten a call from an under aged girl’s father stating that Mr. T had sent photos of his penis to her.  Mr. T denied this and the Detective indicated that he was lying.  The Detective also indicated that Mr. T had spoken to the victim’s father, who had called him.

In reality, Mr. T had spoken to some girls who stated they were over the age of 18.  Two of them had sent him unsolicited photos of themselves naked.  When we got involved, we began contacting the South Carolina Sherriff’s Office and they had never heard of the Deputy who had contacted Mr. T. Through more investigation, we had discovered that this was an ongoing scam, conducted by scammers who would pose as women and send naked photos to men all over the country, then shake them down for financial payments with the threat of prosecution.  If Mr. T were actually charged with these crimes and convicted, he could have spent well over 20 years in prison.  Because we exposed this as a scam fairly quickly, he did not end up sending the “ransom money” that had been requested of him.  No charges were ever brought, and he has no blemish on his record.

(3 Counts) Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation & (1 Count) Felony Attempted Sexual Conduct with a Minor Reduced to Probation with Zero Days in JAILState v. Mr. H (DMC No. 12255) (Yavapai County SuperiorCourt CR2013-80419):

Mr. H was on the Zoosk dating website which requires users to be over 18 years of age.  He contacted a woman claiming to be 21 years old.  This person was actually an undercover Detective.  When he did contact her, she then stated online that she was 13 years old.  At first Mr. H did not believe her that she was only 13 years old.  He then asked for a photo and she sent one of a 13 year old girl (who is now an adult).  The Detective communicated with Mr. H over the course of months. Eventually all the talk became sexual and photographs were sent back and forth which were of a sexual nature.  He also solicited her to meet with him to “take her virginity”.  They discussed the fact that he was 25 and she was 13, and they agreed to meet at a park.  She asked him to bring alcohol and when he pulled up to the park, he was immediately arrested.  He invoked his right to remain silent and was ultimately charged with 3 counts of Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation and Attempted Sexual Conduct with a Minor.  He was facing 3.25 to 16.25 years in prison.

We were able to show that Mr. H did not actually believe this person was 13 years old.  He thought it was a game being played by somebody who was actually 21 years old.  We were also able to demonstrate that if he arrived at the park, and she had in fact looked like a 13 year old, he would have immediately left and ceased all communication with her. We were ultimately were able to secure an offer to Probation which included zero days in jail.

(3 Counts) Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Purposes (Dangerous Crimes Against Children), Felony Tampering with Evidence, Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (DCAC) & Felony Furnishing Obscene Material to a Minor Reduced to 3 Counts with 10 Years in Prison – State v Mr. G (DMC No. 12843) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2014-001975):

Mr. G was a 61 year old teacher at a local elementary school who was accused by another teacher of being “too close” to one of his 14 year old students.  An investigation ensued in which the 14 year old stated that she had sexual intercourse with Mr. G on a couple of occasions.  They had sent sexually explicit photos and text back and forth on her cell phone. Mr. G admittedto everything involved with the cell phones and photos, but he did not agree that he had sex with the victim.  Ultimately a Psycho Sexual Risk Evaluation was conducted and Mitigation materials were put together for the prosecutor.  An offer of 10 to 15 years was received and Mr. G entered into that plea.  At sentencing, the court agreed that he deserved the lowest amount of time under the plea agreement (10 years in prison). He originally was facing the rest of his life in prison.

(4 Counts) Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation (Dangerous Crimes Against Children), (3 Counts) Felony Sexual Exploitation of a Minor) (DCAC) & (4 Counts) Felony Furnishing Harmful or Obscene Materials to a Minor Reduced to 4 Amended Counts with 10 Years in Prison – State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 13767) (Santa Cruz Superior Court CR-15-136):

Mr. B was a teacher at an elementary school in which he had an 8thgrade female student.  The student began receiving threatening texts from other students who were cyber-bullying her.  This resulted in the police becoming involved and analyzing her phone.  During their investigation, they found text messages which were inappropriate between Mr. B and the victim.  There were also nude photographs which had been exchanged.

A search warrant was executed on Mr. B’s phone and at his house the next day.  He was interviewed and admitted to exchanging nude photographs with the victim. He immediately submitted his resignation and surrendered to law enforcement.  Because the victim was 13 years of age, and he was 27 years of age and in a position of authority (i.e. her teacher), he was charged with 11 felonies, which could have resulted in him spending the rest of his life in prison. After conducting a Psycho-Sexual Risk Evaluation which showed him to be an alcoholic, (in which he was drunk when he participated this crime), we were able to show that he was a low risk to re-offend if sober.  An offer was obtained which allowed the judge to sentence him as high as 12 years, but instead he was sentenced to only 10 years.  Because the charges were reduced, he has the chance to only do 8.5 years of that time if he behaves well in prison.  When he gets out, he will still have another 50 plus years of his life ahead of him as a free man.

(2 Counts) Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation & (1 Count) Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (Dangerous Crimes Against Children) Reduced to Attempt with 1 Year in Prison – State v. Mr. M (DMC No. 12163) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2014-000999):

Detectives had received a call from a grandparent stating that Mr. M had been contacting their 13 year old daughter on an internet site. Their conversations had gone on for months and were sexual in nature. They also showed that Mr. M had requested pictures of the 13 years old’s, breast, vagina and anus, and requested a video of her masturbating.  Mr. M was 22 years old and had an IQ of 80.  He was ultimately arrested and admitted to all of the activity.  Although Mr. M was originally facing a minimum of 10 to 24 years in prison on just one of the charges, we were able to demonstrate through Mitigation that due to his low IQ, Probation, or the lowest possible prison time, would be the most appropriate sentence.  We also presented a Psycho Sexual Risk Evaluation (PSRE) which demonstrated he was a low risk to re-offend.   He was ultimately given Probation with 1 year of Prison (in which he ultimately served only 10 months).

Felony Child Prostitution, (2 Counts) Aggravated Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation & (4 Counts) Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation Reduced to Solicitation to Commit Child Abuse with Probation and 120 Days in Jail with Work Furlough/Release – State v Mr. L (DMC No. 13100) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2014-160156):

Mr. L was on an internet chat room when he began conversations with a girl he believed to be 16 years old.  In reality, a Chandler Detective was pretending to be the 16 year old. Mr. L was 42 years old at the time, and began having sexually explicit conversations with the undercover Detective.  During those conversations, Mr. L admitted that he knew he could get in trouble because of her age and his age. He also asked for sexually explicit photographs from the Detective, and he allegedly sent pictures of his penis. They then made arrangements to meet at a gas station and he was asked if he could bring $75 dollars, some Mountain Dew and condoms to give to what he thought was a 16 year old girl.  When he pulls up at the gas station he is immediately arrested and is found to have the $75 dollars, the condoms, Mountain Dew and the cell phones in which he was communicating with the Detective.  When Mr. L was interviewed, he admitted to everything.

We were able to show that the photos found on the cell phones could not match as identifiers to link him directly to the photos. We also argued that the $75 dollars was not directly being used to pay her for sex, as they had already agreed to have sex prior to that conversation.  We stated it could be construed that the money was merely a gift, along with the Mountain Dew.  Ultimately, we were able to convince the prosecution to reduce the charges to Solicitation, and Mr. L was sentenced to Probation with 120 days in jail with work furlough/release.  He was originally facing the possibility of 7 to 21 years in prison.

Call Now Button