Our Location

40 N. Central Ave, Suite 2300
Phoenix, AZ 85004

Free Consultation

(602) 307-0808
Call Now, Open 24/7
January 2, 2016
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100Q Criminal Impersonation Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, Phoenix City Court / Phoenix Municipal Court Victories

State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 4509)

IMPERSONATING a POLICE OFFICER REDUCED to PROBATION with ZERO DAYS in Jail – State v. Mr. P (DMC No. 4509) (Phoenix City Court No. 2998330): Mr. P and his son ran a business as private security guards. They had two vehicles equipped with red and blue lights, yet they were not licensed Police Officers. They arrived at an apartment complex in which undercover Officers were doing surveillance. When one of the undercover Detectives contacted Mr. P, he asked Mr. P if he was a Police Officer. Mr. P said he was a Police Officer and wanted to know why the gentlemen were at the apartment complex. When they identified themselves as actual Police Officers, Mr. P admitted he was not an Officer and he was originally going to be cited with Impersonating a Police Officer pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2411(A). However, the Officer cited him with the misdemeanor offense of Impersonating a Public Officer pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2406. The case was ultimately resolved as a misdemeanor with probation and zero days in jail. Mr. P was allowed to keep his private security license.

January 1, 2016
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100J Obstruction/Hindering Operation Victories, 2000 Juvenile Court Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 8456)

JUVENILE FELONY INTERFERING with an EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION REDUCED to MISDEMEANOR THREATS with ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 8456) (Maricopa County Juvenile Court No. JV175079): Mr. S. had gone with his father to Cabela’s Sporting Goods to look at some different types of camping and hunting gear. When he returned to Millennium High School the next day, he discussed his trip to the sporting goods store with some other students. One of the students claimed that Mr. S stated he was going to shoot his teacher on September 11. When Mr. S was at school on September 11, he was arrested by Police. He was charged with a Felony for Interfering with an Educational Institution under Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2911(A)(1).

We had Mr. S submit to a polygraph in order to determine whether he had actually threatened to shoot his teacher. He stated he had not, and he passed the polygraph. However, several students still claimed that they had heard him make his threats. We ultimately convinced the Prosecutor to drop the case to a simple misdemeanor “Threats” charge with zero days in Jail.

September 1, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100H MIC/MIP Victories, 101 Misc. Crimes Jury/Bench Trial Victories, 1300 Bench Trial Victories, 1300A Complete Bench Trial Acquittal / All Criminal Charges, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. L (DMC No. 9298)

NOT GUILTY/ COMPLETE ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL: MINOR IN CONSUMPTION– State v. Mr. L (DMC No. 9298) (University Lakes Justice Court JC2009-157783): Mr. L was with a group of people in a car that was stopped at Lemon Road and Rural Road in Tempe, Arizona. Mr. L and another passenger had alcohol in their breath, and they were questioned about drinking alcohol. Mr. L was only 18 years old and he admitted he had drank earlier in the night. He was subsequently given a Breath Test which revealed a .106 BAC. At Bench Trial, we argued that the Statue (A.R.S.§ 4-244.41) required the alcohol to be consumed within the Jurisdiction of the University Lakes Justice Court. Because the Officer never asked Mr. L where he had consumed the alcohol, the State could not prove that he consumed within the Jurisdiction. The Judge agreed, and Dismissed all charges against Mr. L.

August 4, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100A Computer Crime Victories, 2100 Superior Court Victories, 400 Theft / Fraud Crime Victories, 47G Extortion Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v. Ms. Q. (DMC No. 10843)

REDUCED | COMPUTER TAMPERING/THEFT by EXTORTION ($27,000) REDUCED to CRIMINAL IMPERSONATION class 6 open/Misdemeanor with PROBATION and ZERO DAYS JAIL – State v. Ms. Q. (DMC No. 10843) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2011-005962): Ms. Q. was fired from her company, and before she left she logged in on her boss’s computer and sent herself an email making it look like she had been threatened and sexually harassed by her boss. She then went to the HR Department and began negotiations regarding a $27,000 settlement. When all of this was discovered, she was charged with computer tampering and extortion. We were able to have the case reduced to a simple “Criminal Impersonation”, which involved probation and no jail. At the conclusion of probation, her case was designated a misdemeanor, and Ms. Q. has no felony on her record.

July 6, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100A Computer Crime Victories, 500 Assault / Violent Crime Victories, 79J Harassment Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. R (DMC No. 7962)

COMPUTER TAMPERING and USE of TELEPHONE to HARASS NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. R (DMC No. 7962) (Tempe Police Department DR08-025032): Mr. R had recently broken up with his girlfriend and was upset. He went on to her “Myspace” webpage and changed her password. He also posted several inappropriate pictures of her in various states of undress. He then went and text her cell phone threatening to send even more pictures to her relatives.

We contacted the detective after Mr. R’s arrest for Computer Tampering per ARS13-2316(A) (S) and Telephone Harassment per ARS 13-2916 (A) and opened up a dialogue. We provided the Detective with a new password so his girlfriend could change the Myspace page. In addition, we agreed to forfeit his cell phone. The detective contacted his ex-girlfriend, and she agreed that was significant punishment. No charges were brought against Mr. R.

July 2, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100 Miscellaneous Crimes Victories, 500 Assault / Violent Crime Victories, 55 Felony Aggravated Assault Reduced, 71-72A Kidnapping Victories, 72 Kidnapping Reduced, 76-78 Misconduct Involving a Weapon Victories, 77 Misconduct Involving a Weapon Reduced, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v. Mr. C (DMC No. 8081)

TERRORISM; AGGRAVATED ASSAULT DANGEROUS (with a knife); KIDNAPPING and MISCONDUCT with WEAPON (gun) all REDUCED to AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (Non Dangerous) and KIDNAPPING with 2.5 YEARS in PRISON – State v. Mr. C (DMC No. 8081) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2007-030014): This was a high profile case in which the domestic terrorism statute was used for the first time. The Maricopa County Attorney at the time – Andrew Thomas (who is now disbarred) used this charged to gain national media attention. We handled the case, and it was featured on ABC’s Good Morning America.

Mr. C was a high school student who had been going through various depressive episodes and was on medication. One day while walking to school, he grabbed a girl from his class and held a knife to her throat and made threats. He then let her go and went home. When police arrived at his house, he was sitting in his house playing video games and he had a back pack next to him which had a gun.  He had told officers how he had been bullied and how he wanted to go to school and shoot everyone. Andrew Thomas then saw his opportunity to charge this as a Terrorism case against a 15 year old boy. Because Mr. C had committed an Aggravated Assault with a dangerous weapon, he was facing a mandatory minimum of 5 to 15 years in prison on that charge alone. The Kidnapping charge carried additional potential prison. Through numerous Settlement Conferences in which we presented evidence of Mr. C’s psychological state, and with added pressure from the citizens of Arizona, Andrew Thomas lowered his offer from 7.5 years in prison to 2.5 years in prison. With good behavior, Mr. C was out after 23 months. This case is a classic example of how a power hungry prosecutor can misuse the law for his own purposes to further his political career. In the end, Andrew Thomas was disbarred for other instances of his Abuse of Power.

February 2, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100S Animal Crime Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, Scottsdale City Court Victories

State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 6485)

CRIMINAL DOG at LARGE REDUCED to CIVIL BARKING DOG TICKET – State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 6485) (Scottsdale City Court 2006-002747): Mr. S had an ongoing feud with his next door neighbor regarding his dogs. His dogs would often get out and would bark at all hours of the night. Police were called, and discovered Mr. S dogs out again. Mr. S had just gotten off of probation for a previous “Barking Dog” ticket. He was subsequently cited for Dog at Large under Scottsdale City Code SRC 4-17C. We were able to get the case reduced from a criminal charge down to a civil Barking Dog charge which included no Jail and only a $100 fine.

February 2, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100O Public Intoxication/Consumption of Alcohol Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 9389)

PUBLIC INTOXICATION DISMISSED – State v. Mr. P (DMC No. 9389) (Scottsdale City Court No. 2008-034054): Mr. P was employed by an Assisted Living Home and was taking care of an elderly gentlemen who was in a wheelchair. Various people called the Police, because they were concerned that Mr. P was impaired and that the gentlemen in the wheelchair was at risk and left unattended outside. When Police made contact with Mr. P, they smelled a strong odor of alcohol and gave him a breath test which revealed a .232 BAC. Mr. P was cited for Public Intoxication under the Scottsdale City Code SRC 19-8A. We argued to the Prosecutor that the City code was “Void for Vagueness”, and therefore Unconstitutional. The Prosecutor agreed and dismissed all charges against Mr. P.

February 2, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100 Miscellaneous Crimes Victories, 1600 Probation Violation Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 6925)

PAROLE REINSTATED – State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 6925) (Arizona Board of Clemency-DOC No. 039589):  Mr. B had previously been convicted of Possession of Stolen Property per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2306 and Promoting Prison Contraband per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2505. He had been released on “community supervision” (Parole) and was subsequently taken into custody when he tested positive for methamphetamine. We were able to have Mr. B enrolled in the “Men In Recovery” program and we showed them that he was provided with unnecessary tools to deal with his drug addiction while outside of prison. Mr. B had originally spent 25 years in prison on a 47 year sentence, and he was now facing the possibility of serving the remaining 22 years in prison. Because of our efforts, he was reinstated on parole and released from prison. He is currently performing admirably and is employed.

February 2, 2015
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 100 Miscellaneous Crimes Victories, 800 Miscellaneous Crime Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v. Mr. A. (DMC No. 6830)

FELONY PROMOTING PRISON CONTRABAND (with PRIOR CONVICTION while on PROBATION) REDUCED to PROBATION with 30 DAYS in Jail – State v. Mr. A (DMC No. 6830) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2006-008600): Mr. A had been convicted of Aggravated Assault and was serving a jail sentence with work release. He returned back to the jail with morphine pills in his pocket. He was subsequently charged with Promoting Prison Contraband (a Class 2 Felony) and was facing over 10 years of potential prison. Promoting Prison Contraband under Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2505 makes it a crime to “knowingly” bring contraband into a jail or prison. We were able to show the Prosecutor that Mr. A did “knowingly” have the pill in his pocket, but he had forgotten it was there when he came back to the jail. We were able to have the case reduced down to a simple probation disposition with 30 days in jail.

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 10
Call Now Button