Our Location

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

Free Consultation

(602) 307-0808
Call Now, Open 24/7
January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 24-25A Child Pornography Victories, 25A Child Pornography Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 6477)

NOT CHARGED | CHILD PORNOGRAPHY (DCAC) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. T. (DMC No. 6477) (Gilbert PD Investigated): Mr. T. took in a roll of film to a Walgreens to have it processed for photographs.  On the roll, were 2 pictures discovered of his daughter exposing herself and touching herself (she was 5 years old).  When Detectives got involved, they executed a search warrant and took all of Mr. T.’s computers.  We sat down with Mr. T. and the Detectives, and allowed them to interview Mr. T.  In addition, we showed Detectives that the person taking these photos was about the same height as the 5 year old, and it was during the 5 year olds birthday party in which many children were present that day.  In other words, another 5 year old child probably took the pictures.  Mr. T. was eventually cleared, and no charges were ever brought.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 24-25A Child Pornography Victories, 25A Child Pornography Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. G (DMC No. 6749)

NOT CHARGED | 4 COUNTS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY (DCAC) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 6749) (Phoenix PD Investigated): Mr. G. is a gay male who ordered four adult pornography 8 millimeter tapes from EBay.  When he received them, he took them to a local video store to be converted.  While being converted, the employee of the store noticed images of child pornography and called police.  When Mr. G. was contacted, we became involved and brought him into the station to sit down with police in order to be questioned.  We also presented covers of the four boxes, which showed adult males (not children).  Mr. G. had never viewed the tapes, nor did he have any way to view them, prior to taking them into the video store.  After meeting with Detectives, they still routed the file for charges with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.  We were able to convince the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office that there was “no intent” and they decided to not bring charges.  Mr. G. was originally facing a minimum of 40 years in prison.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 30 Indecent Exposure Dismissals, 30-32 Indecent Exposure Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 600 Drug Crimes Victories, 700 Property Crime Victories, 82A Possession/Paraphernalia Dismissals, 95 Trespass Victories, Case Victories, Justice Court Victories, University Lakes Justice Court Victories

State v. Mr. G (DMC No. 4380)

ALL DISMISSED | INDECENT EXPOSURE/POSSESSION of DRUG PARAPHERNALIA/TRESPASS and INTERFERING WITH AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION ALL DISMISSED –  State v. Mr. G. (DMC No. 4380) (University Lakes Justice Court CR01-01763): Mr. G. was accused of being near a girl’s dormitory at ASU exposing himself while wearing very tight and small red shorts.  When police made contact, they discovered he had some drug paraphernalia on him for smoking marijuana.  They also cited him with trespass, interfering with an educational institution, along with indecent exposure.  When we took the case and interviewed the civilian witness, it was discovered that he was never actually seen exposing or touching himself, this was just the assumption that was made based upon his unusual behavior.  We then convinced the prosecutor that we would most likely succeed on a Motion for “no probable cause for arrest”, and “illegal search”, and the State agreed to dismiss all charges.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 23A Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct with a Minor Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. W (DMC No. 10434)

NOT CHARGED | SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 10434) (Chandler Police Department Investigated): Mr. W. was married at the time he began having a relationship with a woman who held herself out to be 18 years of age.  In reality, she was only 17.  When the girl’s mother, along with Mr. W.’s wife found out about the relationship, they reported him to police.  We were able to show that Mr. W. truly believed that the alleged victim was 18 years old.  By statute, there was a defense to the charge if a person is 15, 16, or 17 years of age, had sex and held themselves out to be 18 years or older.  Mr. W. was originally facing up to 2 years in prison per sexual conduct incident if he would have been charged and convicted.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 23A Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct with a Minor Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 38B Sexual Abuse Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. R (DMC No. 10230)

NOT CHARGED | 4 COUNTS OF CHILD MOLESTATION (DCAC)/4 COUNTS OF SEXUAL ABUSE  | State v. Mr. R.  (DMC No. 10230) (Chandler PD Investigated): Mr. R. was married to his wife for 6 years when the 14 year old step-daughter accused him of ongoing sexual conduct.  A “confrontation call” was conducted between the alleged victim and Mr. R. (which was tape-recorded by police) in which he denied everything.  He was subsequently arrested and brought into the station where he invoked his right to counsel.  We then brought Mr. R. back to the station where we allowed him to be interviewed by Detectives with us present.  We also submitted copies of the ongoing divorce paperwork which had since been filed, which contained inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s story.  Although the Detectives routed the case to the County Attorney’s Office, we were able to convince the prosecutor not to file charges.  Mr. R. was originally facing a minimum of 40 years in prison if he was to be convicted.

 

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 23A Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct with a Minor Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. N (DMC No. 4738)

NOT CHARGED | SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH MINOR (DCAC)  State v. Mr. N. (DMC No. 4738) (Phoenix PD Investigated): Mr. N. was a local high school teacher and a cross country coach who was friendly with his students and athletes.  He would give the alleged victim (who was 16 years old) rides home and would counsel her.  The alleged victim eventually got pregnant, and her family began accusing Mr. N. (even though the victim denied this).  We later presented evidence to the Detective that the baby was in fact the alleged victim’s boyfriend.  Because there was no actual evidence of a crime, Mr. N. was not charged and was allowed to keep his job as a teacher.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 23A Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct with a Minor Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 10209)

NOT CHARGED | SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH MINOR (DCAC) – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 10209) (Phoenix PD Investigated):  Mr. S. was over 18 and began a relationship with a girl who claimed to be 18 years old on Craig’s List.  They met multiple times, and she sent multiple text to him stating she was 18.  In actuality, the girl was 16, and her mother found out about the relationship.  Police investigated and we provided information that this girl had been holding herself out as 18 to Mr. S.  Because of a defense that exists by statute for alleged victims who are 15, 16, or 17 who hold themselves out as 18 or above, we were able to convince the Detective not to file charges.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 21 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 23A Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct with a Minor Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. & Mrs. W (DMC No. 10211 & 10212)

NOT CHARGED | SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR (DCAC) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. & Mrs. W.  (DMC No. 10211 & 10212) (Phoenix Police Investigated): Mr. & Mrs. W. were Jehovah’s Witnesses who raised 5 kids in a very strict environment.  The older children had become adults and moved away and harbored ill feelings towards Mr. & Mrs. W.  One child was in high school and was still living in the household.  After meeting with the older siblings, they created a “repressed memory” scenario with counselors in which they alleged they had been all ritualistically molested since childhood.  CPS removed the daughter and she moved in with the sisters and enjoyed new freedom.  Mr. & Mrs. W. consensually went in and spoke with Detectives, and we had them take a polygraph (in which they passed).  We then submitted everything to the Detectives and Prosecutors.  No charges were ever filed.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 113 Sex Crime Pre-Charge Victories, 23A Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct with a Minor Pre-Charge Victories, 300 Sex Crime Victories, 900 Pre-Charge Case Victories, Case Victories

State v. Mr. A (DMC No. 6735)

 NOT CHARGED | SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR (DCAC) | State v. Mr. A. (DMC No. 6735) (Glendale PD Investigated): Mr. A.’s step-daughter had a history of mental illness and drug abuse.  She had previously accused her grandfather of molesting her, and he was tried and convicted.  She now accused Mr. A. of doing the same thing, and Mr. A.’s wife threw him out of the house and began divorce proceedings.  We became involved and were able to shut down the investigation by showing this was a ploy to gain leverage in the child custody proceedings.   Mr. A. also had an 8 year old and a 2 year old child with his wife that they were now fighting over.  Because the allegations involved sexual conduct over the course of a 6 year period while the alleged victim was a minor, Mr. A. had originally been facing a potential of life in prison.

January 10, 2014
Posted on Author By dmcantor Categories 2100 Superior Court Victories, 23 Child Molestation/Sexual Conduct With Minor Reduced, 300 Sex Crime Victories, Case Victories, Maricopa County Superior Court Victories

State v. Ms. G. (DMC No. 10536)

REDUCED | 4 COUNTS OF SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH A MINOR REDUCED to “child abuse” with zero days jail – State v. Ms. G. (DMC No. 10536) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2011-123037): Ms. G. was a 19 year old who began having a lesbian relationship with a 16 year old.  The 16 year old’s father “caught them in the act”, and police were called.  Admissions were made, and Ms. G. was arrested and charged.  We were able to show the prosecution that there was no force involved, and this was a completely consensual relationship. Originally they wanted her to remain a convicted felon, but eventually we talked them into offering a reduced “child abuse” charge class 6 “open”, which became a misdemeanor after Ms. G. completed 2 years of probation.  Ms. G. has no felony on her record.

1 … 18 19 20 21 22 … 28
Call Now Button