Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: 800 Miscellaneous Crime 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. H (DMC No. 11744) – Felony Illegally Conducting an Enterprise/RICO ($132,755 in Counterfeit Checks), Felony Computer Tampering, Felony Attempted Fraudulent Schemes & (2 Counts) Forgery – Reduced to Possession of a Forgery Device with Probation and Zero Days in Jail – Maricopa County Superior Court (Case No. CR2013-002470).

Mr. H was involved in an Illegal Enterprise which was engaged in manufacturing fake checks and then cashing them. The checks were manufactured by utilizing a computer to print false checks with false bank routing numbers. This particular activity is known as “Computer Tampering.” Once the Illegal Enterprise would create the fake checks, they would then be distributed to individuals to cash at various retail outlets. Mr. H. was one of the people who received checks that were created by the Enterprise and he was one of the individuals responsible for cashing them. Once the Police became aware of this, they arrested several of the check cashers and had them become “Confidential Informants.” Eventually, a 61 co-defendant indictment, which included 328 charges, was handed down by a Grand Jury.

When we became involved in the case, we immediately began working with Detectives and Prosecutors in order to cooperate and to provide Mitigation on Mr. H’s behalf. Unfortunately, Mr. H. had become addicted to heroin, and had only gone for various brief stretches in his life where he was sober. He was married and had several small children when he fell off the wagon. He had lost his job and started using heroin again.

He became involved in the Conspiracy in order to receive money to support his drug habit. During the Pretrial phase of the case, we had Mr. H. go into inpatient rehab, which he successfully completed. We also had him make Restitution in full for his portion of the Fraud Scheme. Ultimately, the Prosecutor offered a plea to Possession of a Forgery Device, which included Probation and Zero Days in Jail. If Mr. H. had been convicted of all charges, there would have been mandatory Prison time required due to the amount of the loss being greater than $100,000. He is now sober and his family is intact.

State v. Bagdad Hillside LLC (DMC No. 15240) – (3 Counts) Felony Discharge Elimination System Violation ($950,000 Violation) – Not Charged As To Our Client Mr. G /Former Owner of Bagdad Hillside – Maricopa County Superior Court (Case No. CR2017-002439).

Mr. G was a former owner of the Bagdad Hillside Mine. He had sold all ownership interest when a Complaint was brought forward by the Arizona Attorney General for Discharge Elimination System Violations. The Bagdad Hillside Mine was located adjacent to Boulder Creek. This part is of the Bill Williams River watershed and a tributary to Alamo Lake. It has been stipulated that the water is to be protected for human and animal use, including full body contact. The Hillside Mine which was adjacent to Boulder Creek had a large amount of mining tailings (which are the remains from digging out a mine). At some point in the past, the miners hit ground water and the mine started to fill up. The lowest level of the shaft was 900 ft. below and the miners put in a drainage shaft and called it an ADIT (a horizontal passage leading into a mine for the purposes of access or drainage). The drainage shaft would then continually drain water into Boulder Creek.

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) continually tested the water over several years and found that the average levels of arsenic were 200 times higher than the allowed levels to be in discharged water. The Enforcement Officer for ADEQ, testified that she had contact with the Bagdad Chief Financial Officer on numerous times and tried to correct the problem with him. She sent Notice of Violations and they worked out a Consent Order. None of these Consent Orders were followed. Ultimately, 3 Counts of Felony Discharge of an Elimination System Violation were filed and a Bench Trial was held against the corporation. Through process of the Trial, both the Chief Financial Officer and Mr. G were mentioned by the ADEQ. Although the Corporation was found guilty and was issued a fine of $950,000, Mr. G was not individually convicted of anything, nor was he responsible to pay any of that fine.

State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 14374) – Felony Aggravated Assault Dangerous (Car v. Police Officer) and Misdemeanor Obstructing Governmental Operations – Reduced to Attempted Aggravated Assault with Probation and 90 Days in Jail – Maricopa County Superior Court (Case No. CR2016-146209).

Mr. B was a 67-year old man who had an anxiety disorder. He had gone to Fry’s in order to pick up a prescription for his medication and some groceries. An hour later when he left the Fry’s store, he got into his vehicle and drove towards the exit, where he saw an Officer parked diagonally blocking the entrance to the street. The officer was there working on a different case/arrest.

As Mr. B approached the Officer, he asked the Officer to move his car and the Officer said no. The Officer claimed that Mr. B was screaming at him. The officer then stated that Mr. B got into his car and slowly drove at him and then accelerated rapidly. The Officer claimed he jumped to the side and pulled out his firearm, at which point Mr. B stopped his car. He then came up to Mr. B and holstered his weapon and asked for Mr. B’s license. Per the Officer, Mr. B then put his car in reverse and attempted to flee again. Mr. B was stopped by other Officers in the parking lot and he refused to get out of the vehicle. He was then forcibly removed and arrested for Felony Aggravated Assault Dangerous on a Police Officer and Misdemeanor of Obstructing Governmental Operations.

Once we became involved, we retrieved all of Mr. B’s medical records in order to present them as mitigation to the Prosecutor. In addition, we interviewed all of the other Officers involved, and the stories were not matching up. We also presented evidence of his military service in Vietnam and his long-term employment with the United States Postal Service. Mr. B had also performed numerous prior good acts of community support, he had strong family contributions and responsibilities, he lacked prior bad acts, he had good character reputation, he was filled with remorse, and he behaved admirably during his pretrial phase.

The Prosecutor ultimately agreed to a plea of Attempted Aggravated Assault with a 90-day jail sentence. At Sentencing, the Prosecutor wanted 3 years of Probation, and the victim/Police Officer wanted 90 days of flat jail time. The Judge ultimately only imposed 2 years of Probation and allowed the 90 days to be served in the infirmary due to Mr. B’s health conditions. Originally, Mr. B was facing 10.5 to 21 years in prison  if he were to be convicted on the Aggravated Assault Dangerous on a Police Officer.

Mr. D was a Sergeant for the Phoenix Police Department who had worked there for a number of years. An audit was conducted on his timesheets by the Department’s Professional Standards Bureau Inspection Unit based upon tips from other disgruntled officers who worked below Sergeant D. It was determined that Sergeant D had falsified his timesheets and had been overpaid for 206 hours of work based upon either showing up late, leaving early, or not showing up to work at all, and yet claiming full time employment. Ultimately, Sergeant D was charged with Felony Tampering with Public Records per A.R.S. 13-2407, Felony Fraudulent Schemes and Felony Theft. After these charges arose, Sergeant D retired from the Phoenix Police Department.

When we became involved in the case, we had Sergeant D pay back the misappropriated $9,861 immediately. In addition, we sent the Prosecutor mitigation documents showing that Sergeant D had been in the Air Force, was married with children, and he had been stabbed while on duty as a Police Officer, in which he had received multiple service metals for bravery and other commendations. We also showed that he was fired upon by a suspect who ended up killing a fellow Officer directly in front him. This left Sergeant D with PTSD that was never properly treated or addressed by the Phoenix Police Department.

Once we received an offer to the Class 6 Open/Misdemeanor Theft with Probation, we then proceeded to Sentencing. After a very detailed Sentencing with numerous letters and people from the community speaking on Sergeant D’s behalf, we were able to secure a Sentence of only 9 months of Probation and zero days in jail. Initially, Sergeant D was facing the prospect of prison time and the loss of his pension. Neither of those things happened.

For a 1 ½ year period, the Drug Enforcement Agency conducted an undercover investigation of various drug trafficking organizations. This particular organization was known for trafficking large amounts of money, marijuana, methamphetamine and cocaine. All of which was imported from Mexico into the United States. Using wire taps and other undercover activities, the DEA observed Mr. K at a high level hotel in Chicago, Illinois exchanging money.

Subsequently, a traffic stop was conducted and Mr. K was found to have a duffel bag containing $84,900 in his possession. Ultimately, indictments of 43 co-conspirators were handed down, of which Mr. K was one. During the investigation with Mr. K, he accepted responsibility and admitted that on five or six other occasions, he went to Mexico and trafficked in money. This was due to severe financial hardship as a result of many years of drought in his home state which affected his farming business.

Due to his cooperation with the Prosecutor, combined with an extensive amount of mitigation, we were able to secure an offer that would allow the Judge to potentially sentence Mr. K to no jail time at all. He was facing 4.5 years minimum if he were to have gone to Trial and been convicted on all counts. Ultimately, Mr. K plead to a reduced charge of Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering and received Probation with zero days in jail.

Felony Custodial Interference Not Charged – State v. Mr. M (DMC No. 13542) (Phoenix Police Department DR2014-00120362): Mr. M was friends with a couple who had a minor child.  The couple ended up getting divorced, and Mr. M was friends with the mother of the child and not the father or the paternal grandparents.  Ultimately, the father died in a car accident, and the paternal grandparents were seeking visitation rights.  The mother then fled to Canada with the child to begin a new life.

Once the mother was located with the child, an investigation began against the mother for Custodial Interference. Because Mr. M had been friends with the mother and had given her financial assistance in the past, he then became a target of the police Detectives to also be charged with Custodial Interference. We were able to show the Detectives that in no way had he provided financial aid or counseling for the purposes of fleeing the country.  We put together a packet of information which was forwarded to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, and the case was turned down for charges against Mr. M.

(2 Counts) Felony Computer Tampering & (2 Counts) Felony Trafficking in Stolen Property ($20,400) Reduced to Probation with 30 Days in Jail – State v. Mr. M (DMC No. 13909) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2015-158379):  Mr. M worked for the Life Lock company and was accused of taking approximately 10 laptop computers and selling them online on Craigslist.  The ads on Craigslist claimed that these computers were “recycled”.  An undercover Tempe police officer made an arrangement to meet with Mr. M and purchase a computer for $1,000.  After that purchase was complete, officers then showed up to Mr. M’s house with a search warrant and confiscated other computers.  He was ultimately charged with 2 counts of Computer Tampering and 2 counts of Trafficking in Stolen Property.

The reason for the charge of Computer Tampering was for the deletion of items that were on those laptops originally. Ultimately, we were able to show some mitigating factors on behalf of Mr. M.  The state agreed to a plea which included Probation and 30 days of initial jail. Other jail was left hanging over his head, but that could be deferred upon successful completion of Probation. Mr. M successfully completed Probation, paid restitution and avoided a potential aggravated sentence of over 10 years in prison.

Felony Child Prostitution (4 Counts) Felony Sexual Exploitation of Minor/Child Pornography and (4 Counts) Sexual Conduct with a Minor, Public Sexual Indecency & Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor Reduced to 5 Years in Prison – State v. Mr. A (DMC No. 13606) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2015-114258): Mr. A had been living with a roommate for many years.  Also with the roommate had two young daughters who lived with them. Mr. A thought that one of the daughters was now 18 years of age, when in reality she was 15 years old.  He and another woman engaged in sex acts with the 15 year old, all while on videotape.  He also offered money for this activity along with alcohol.  He was ultimately charged with Child Prostitution per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-3212, and 4 counts of Child Pornography (because some of the acts were filmed), 4 counts of Sexual Conduct with a Minor, along with Public Sexual Indecency and Contributing to the Delinquency of Minor.

He was facing the rest of his life in prison, and his only defense was that he thought she was 18 years of age.  This defense was problematic, due to the fact that he also admitted that he knew her since she was 8 years old when he first met her, yet that was only 7 years prior.  This would put her age at 15.  Ultimately the state made several offers which eventually got down to a low offer of a stipulated 5 years in prison.  Mr. A accepted that offer, which was far below the standard offer for these types of charges.

(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.

Call Now Button