Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: 300 Sex Crime Victories

State v. Mr. S (DMC NO. 14464) – Juvenile Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor – Dismissed Pre-Adjudication, with Prejudice – Maricopa County Superior Court, Juvenile Division (Case No. JV601278).

Mr. L was a 17-year old boy enrolled at Queen Creek High School who was dating a 15-year old girl. While traveling home on the school bus, she had oral sex with him. Approximately, 3 months later, after they had broken up, she made an allegation that she was forced to do this. In the past, this girl had accused two other boys and had them both arrested for sexual acts. Mr. L. was ultimately taken into custody and arrested for Sexual Assault.

We became involved in the case and we were able to show that this girl was suicidal, bi-polar and had behavioral disorders. In addition, she was dating a new boyfriend who pushed the agenda to have Mr. L charged with a crime. We also presented evidence to the Prosecutor that Mr. L was on an IEP (Individualized Developmental Program) and was developmentally delayed.

The Juvenile Prosecutor informed us that she was going to instead charge Mr. L with Sexual Conduct with a Minor instead of Sexual Assault. We got her to agree that if Mr. L. did some classes prior to the first court date, she would Dismiss the case with prejudice in a “Pre-Adjudication” status. Mr. L did all the counseling that was required of him through the Banner Health System. When we arrived at court, the case was Dismissed with prejudice. Mr. L then turned 18 and he has no criminal record whatsoever.  Originally, he was facing prison time up until his 18th birthday, or potentially being charged as an adult, which would expose him to well over a decade of prison time.

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.

Mr. H. was a college student at ASU who lived in the dorms. He had been seeing a young lady casually who lived in a different dorm. About 10:00 at night he went over to this girl’s dorm to help her with her math and drink some “Fireball” whiskey. The girl also used a marijuana wax pen. They eventually began making out, and were engaging in some heavy-petting when her ex-boyfriend texted her saying “she was hot.” At that time, the mood was ruined and Mr. H left to go back to his dorm.

Upon arriving to his dorm, he told his roommate and his roommate’s girlfriend what had happened. They told him to go back over to her dorm room and talk with her about it. At about 1:10 in the morning, he walked back over and knocked on her door. He went inside, and they began making out and engaging in sexual contact. Eventually, the girl said she was “tired,” and Mr. H. got the hint and left her dorm room. The next day, Mr. H. was contacted by an ASU police Detective in order to question him and receive a buccal swab (for DNA testing) from his mouth.

We got involved and were able to secure various text messages that were sent from the girl immediately before and after the alleged Sexual Assault. There was no mention of sexual assault in any of those texts, and the alleged Sexual Assault wasn’t reported until the next day. It was our hypothesis that her recently former boyfriend who texted her that night, had come over later and was upset that she was with Mr. H. We were able to show the Detectives all of the evidence, along with a passed polygraph test, that Mr. H. only engaged in consensual sexual activity with this young lady. Although, he originally was facing a minimum of 10 years in prison, no charges were ever brought against Mr. H.

Mr. S was a high school student who got involved with two older high school students who sold drugs and had violent dispositions. Mr. S. had received a call from one of the Co-Defendants stating that he had been ripped off by two other kids in a drug deal and wanted Mr. S to go with them in order to “have their back.” At some point prior, Mr. S. provided them with some bullets for a gun he thought they would be shooting in the desert (completely unrelated to the drug robbery). Mr. S. was instructed to convince the two victims to go into the desert to “smoke some weed.”

When all 3 arrived at a predetermined location, the two Co-Defendants jumped out of the bushes and held the two victims at gunpoint and knifepoint. One of the victims was instructed to “suck his dick,” referring to the other victim. Both of them were males. The victims were pleading with the Co-Defendants not to shoot them and not make them participate in that activity, which they were still forced to do.

Mr. S. only stood-by as a lookout, and was not aware that any of that activity was going to be taking place. The two Co-Defendants had a gun and knife, and Mr. S. did not have any weapon on him. The victims were told to urinate on all of their clothing and throw it around the general area. The Defendants then left, and the victims contacted the police. Mr. S. was the only Defendant to cooperate with the authorities. He showed him where the gun was stored and the location of where other items were deposited. This was done with our help. Ultimately, we secured an offer that included no agreements as to sentencing.

One of the Co-Defendants was sentenced to 9 years in prison, and the other was sentenced to 5 years in prison. We presented extensive mitigation to the Court, and we were also able to secure a request for leniency from one of the victims’ mothers. Although the Judge was initially inclined to sentence Mr. S. to prison, or at least 1 year in jail, we were able to convince the Judge to defer all jail time. Mr. S. successfully completed probation, did not do any time in jail, and is currently enrolled in college. Originally, he was facing a potential of life in prison.

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.

(2 Counts) Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (DCAC) and Felony Child Molestation (DCAC) Dismissed – State v. Mr. H (DMC No. 14557) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2016-153068):  Mr. H was married to a woman who had a 14 year old daughter.  He and the alleged victim had fallen asleep on a couch and when he woke up and found that she had her hand on his crotch.  He immediately brought this to the mother’s attention and they became concerned that his step-daughter was overly sexualized. Later, they learned that she had been having sex with her boyfriend.

At the point they found out that the step-daughter was having sex, they transferred her to a different high school. She became very upset and got into a physical altercation with her mother.  She then reported the incident on the couch to her school, but she had now claimed that it was her step-dad who was touching her.  Mr. H was immediately arrested and put in jail.  We became involved and had him released on a low bond.  As we were investigating the case, we secured a private investigator to interview all parties involved.  When the step-daughter had broken up with her boyfriend, information was received from him indicating that she had lied.  Eventually, she admitted that she had lied and she had written a letter to both her mom and step-father admitting she had lied.  This was provided to the Police and the Prosecutor, and all charges were dropped.  If Mr. H would have been convicted on all 3 counts, he would have spent a minimum of 36 years in prison.

Indecent Exposure DismissedState v. Mr. V (DMC No. 13381) (Mammoth Justice Court CR2015-023): Mr. V was inside of a convenience store when he asked if he could use a restroom.  He was pointed to the restroom by a female employee.  After he came out of the restroom, he bought a Monster energy drink at the cash register, and then he left. The person behind the register accused him of having his penis exposed while he was standing at the register.  He was then charged with Indecent Exposure per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1402.

There was no surveillance video in the store which showed this (due to the angles of the cameras line of sight), however, the Police still executed a search warrant at Mr. V’s home.  When we became involved in the case, we also determined that the alleged victim in the case did not want to continue seeking prosecution. Although there had been allegations out of other jurisdictions, the charge in the Mammoth Justice Court jurisdiction had “proof problems”.  Ultimately, the Prosecutor agreed with us and Dismissed all charges.

Student Not Expelled – Title 9/School Disciplinary Hearing (Sexual Assault and Endangerment) ASU v Mr. M (DMC No. 13778) (Arizona State University Student Rights and Responsibilities Office Investigated):  Mr. M has not been feeling well and was in his student dorm room when he heard a party going on across the court yard.  He looked out of his window, and saw somebody wave him over to the residence across the way.  He changed his clothes, and walked over about 10 minutes later.  The door was open, and as he walked into the dorm room and walked around, he heard voices inside the room, but nobody was there. He then heard people enter the room, and he got scared and hid in a closet.

Ultimately, a female student entered the room and turned out the lights in order to go to sleep.  He walked out of closet and immediately exited the dorm room.   He was followed by another student, and eventually the police were called to Mr. M’s apartment.  He was then arrested.

He was subsequently accused of violating the Student Code of Conduct regarding ABOR Code 5-308 (F-2) entitled Endangerment; Code 5-308 (F-9) entitled Trespass and Code 5-308, (F-23), Entitled Non-Consensual Sexual Conduct.  We were able to show at the Hearing that Mr. M had been ill, plus he had been experiencing other mental issues which now required medication.  He had no intent of harming anyone, but generally thought he had been invited over to a party.  ASU ruled that he was not in violation of the Trespass or Sexual Conduct Codes of Conduct, but that he was only in violation of the Endangering Code of Conduct.  He was not expelled, and was allowed to finish out his classes and graduate from ASU.

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.

Call Now Button