Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: Scottsdale City Court Victories

(Dec. 6, 2018) NOT GUILTY/COMPLETE ACQUITTAL at JURY TRIAL – SUPER EXTREME DWI (.235 BAC) & EXTREME DWI, DUI & DWI – State v. Ms. L (DMC No. 15440) (Scottsdale City Court TR2017-031349): At 2:53 in the morning, a Scottsdale Police Officer was patrolling the parking lot of Nordstrom’s Rack located in North Scottsdale.  The officer observed a vehicle that had driven up on the sidewalk in front of the Nordstrom’s Rack. The vehicle had its engine running, headlights and running lights illuminated.  Inside of the vehicle was Ms. L, who was asleep and her car was in drive.

When Ms. L was awakened, she did not recall how she got there.  She subsequently provided a blood test, which revealed a .235 BAC.  After she was released from custody, she found out that her former boss and his girlfriend had driven her to that location in their car. The three of them were at a holiday party where Ms. L had become extremely intoxicated.  Ms. L’s boss’s girlfriend began to yell at him, and he put her inside of the vehicle with the engine on and the heater running. He left a verbal message for one of her friends to come and get her. At the Scottsdale City Court trial, the boss came in and testified that he indeed and placed her in the vehicle and then started the engine. Since nobody knows how the car got up on the sidewalk or why it was in drive, the jury had reasonable doubt as to Ms. L actually operating the vehicle.  They found that she was not in “Actual Physical Control” and she was acquitted of all charges.

ASSAULT, CRIMINAL DAMAGE and DISORDERLY CONDUCT DISMISSED at BENCH TRIAL – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 12027) (Scottsdale City Court 2013-030918): Mr. T was a professional athlete who had played running back for the Arizona Cardinals. Police were called to his house by his then live-in girlfriend regarding a “domestic violence.” They had been arguing about personal matters and had “broken up” earlier that day. Mr. T had departed and then returned to the house with a plane ticket for his girlfriend to fly to New York (as a parting gift).

At that time, she walked into the bathroom and began smashing items on the ground. These items include of various perfumes and some picture frames. Mr. T held her in order to keep her from damaging any more property. She subsequently received a minor injury and then called Police.

When Police arrived, they observed various broken items and ultimately charged Mr. T with Assault, per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1203, Criminal Damage per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1602, and Disorderly Conduct per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2904. Pursuant to policy, he was arrested and taken to Jail at that time. His young daughter was also in the household and was taken away by CPS. I received a call from Mr. T’s sports agent immediately after Mr. T had been released on his own recognizance. I then met with Mr. T at his house, toured the alleged crime scene and went over the facts of the case. After we interviewed both Officers involved and the CPS Specialist who met with the child at the Family Advocacy Center, we then began to attempt to have the charges dismissed by the Scottsdale City Prosecutors Office. The case was eventually set to Trial, and on the day of Trial, the State dismissed all charges.

PREVENTION of the USE of a TELEPHONE in an EMERGENCY, DISORDERLY CONDUCT and (2 Counts) ASSAULT DISMISSED at BENCH TRIAL – State v. Mr. A (DMC No. 7952) (Scottsdale City Court CR2007-032630): Police had received a 911 call in which the person calling hung up the phone and did not speak, when they arrived at the location to conduct a “Welfare Check”, they contacted Mr. A’s wife. She said that she had called Police and had been arguing with her husband, and that she had been pushed down on the couch and that he had hung up the phone. Mr. A was then charged with Prevention of the Use of a Telephone in an Emergency per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-2915(A)(3). He was also charged with 2 Counts of Assault and Disorderly Conduct. We argued that it was his wife who choose to hang up the phone, and that she had actually attacked Mr. A first. When it came time for a Bench Trial against Mr. A, the Prosecutor choose to dismiss the charges against him.

NOT RESPONSIBLE/ COMPLETE ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL: FAILURE to YIELD to AVOID A COLLISION – State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 6074) (Scottsdale City Court TR2006-000401): Mr. B was in his car with his wife at Stagecoach Road approaching Pima Road in Scottsdale, Arizona. After they had looked both ways, he made a right hand turn slowly, and another car struck him. The driver of the other car had a suspended license. At Bench Trial, we argued that the other driver did not have his headlights on and also was not paying attention as there was no skid on the roadway. The Judge agreed with us and Dismissed the charge of Failure to Control Speed to Avoid a Collision. Because of the seriousness of the accident, Mr. B would have been put at risk for an extremely large civil settlement if he would have lost at trial.

NOT GUILTY/ COMPLETE ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL: RECKLESS DRIVING – State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 8519) (Scottsdale City Court TR2008-028574): Mr. S was a juvenile who was attending Desert Mountain High School and was driving out of the parking lot as school let out.  An off-duty Police Officer who acted as a Security Officer was attempting to direct traffic for 2 exits simultaneously. Mr. S began to turn right when the Officer stepped in front of his car to waive him off. As Mr. S was going 3-5mph, he struck the Officer and ran over his foot. At Bench Trial, we were able to show the Judge that this was not an intentional act and he was not in “reckless disregard” for the safety of another person. The Judge agreed with us and found Mr. S Not Guilty of Reckless Driving.

ENDANGERMENT/ASSAULT and THREATS DISMISSED – State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 9812) (Scottsdale City Court CR2010-030292): Mr. C. was travelling in the back of a cab with another passenger when he lit a bank receipt on fire and held it within a foot from the cab driver’s head and the roof of the cab.  The officer was directly behind the cab and witnessed the entire incident.  He pulled Mr. C. over, and charged him with endangerment, assault and threats.  After interviewing all of the witness and the cab driver, we were able to convince the Prosecutor that nobody was actually endangered, assaulted or threatened.  The Prosecutor agreed to dismiss all charges in exchange for Mr. C. taking alcohol abuse classes.

PARTIAL ACQUITTAL at BENCH TRIAL | 2 COUNTS of ASSAULT – State v. Mr. P. (DMC No. 4661) (Scottsdale City Court CR200406289): Mr. P. was going through custody issues with his ex-wife, when he was accused of threatening her, spitting in her face and grabbing her. At trial we were able to prove he never threatened his ex-wife, nor did he ever spit in her face. However, he did admit to grabbing her arm. He was acquitted of the charge of spitting on and threatening his ex-wife.

DRAG RACING and ENDANGERMENT REDUCED to RECKLESS DRIVING with 2 DAYS in JAIL – State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 8126) (Scottsdale City Court TR2008-008525): Officers were in Scottsdale near the “Flickas” bar at Scottsdale Road and Indian School. They had observed 3 vehicles racing at 90 miles per hour down Scottsdale Road, and then they were seen again racing down McDowell Road. Only Mr. S’s vehicle was pulled over, and Mr. S’s passenger stated that they were going 120 miles per hour. Mr. S was then arrested and taken into custody.

We were able to convince the Prosecutor that because there were no admission by Mr. S, and the fact that his passenger might be unwilling to cooperate, they offered a much lower Reckless Driving charge with 2 days in jail. If Mr. S had been convicted of the Endangerment and Drag Racing, he would have lost his license for over a year. He would have also been subjected to potentially 1 year in jail.

NOT GUILTY/ COMPLETE ACQUITTAL at JURY TRIAL: SUPER EXTREME DWI (.214 BAC) EXTREME DUI, DUI and DWI – State v. Ms. W (DMC No. 12692) Mar. 17, 2015 (Scottsdale City Court TR2014-015549): Ms. W was a passenger with a friend who was driving on 2nd Street between Goldwater Boulevard and 68th Street in Downtown Scottsdale. A Police Officer was seen up ahead, and the friend pulled the car over “because he was really drunk”, and didn’t want to get in trouble. Ms. W got out the car and walked to the driver’s side and got in while the driver slid over to the passenger seat. While she was sitting in the car, the engine was on and the air conditioner was on (it was the height of summer). She got on her cell phone to call to have a ride come pick them both up.

The Police contacted Ms. W and arrested her for DUI and underage drinking and driving. They claim that she was in “Actual Physical Control” (APC) of the vehicle. At Jury Trial, we presented evidence that Ms. W was merely using the car as “temporary shelter” until her ride would arrive. The Jury agreed that she was not actually operating the car, and she was found Not Guilty of these charges.

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.

1 2 3 6
Call Now Button