My client, who recently lost her job and had no prior criminal record, sadly turned to prostitution to support her two children who just began college. She rented an apartment and hired another woman to split the profits with her. The other woman was also working as a prostitute and would give my client some of the money she earned to pay the apartment bills and paid “referral” fees for the “Johns” that my client brought to the apartment. After a sting operation in which a police officer pretended to be a potential “John”, my client was charged with felony pimping under Penal Code section 266h(a). She confessed to the crime and the other woman also confessed and made incriminating statements against my client. Unfortunately, pimping carries a mandatory minimum prison sentence of 3 years and probation is not allowed. Throughout the arraignment, pretrial hearing and preliminary hearing, the DA’s offer was 3 years in state prison. After several weeks of gathering character letters and evidence to show the extreme mitigating factors surrounding my client’s life, and researching alternative charges that would allow probation, the District Attorney eventually agreed to amend the charge to conspiracy, which does allow probation. My client was able to avoid a mandatory minimum prison sentence and will serve approximately 30 days more in county jail, at which time she will be released.

My client was an older gentleman who had a prior misdemeanor hit and run from a year ago. He was charged with a second offense this year. The victim alleged my client side-swiped him and that my client left the scene without stopping to exchange his insurance information. A conviction for this offense would have resulted in the loss of my client’s driver’s license and a loss of his independence. The investigating officer did not handle the case in a professional manner and never took any photos of the victim’s vehicle. My client denied hitting the victim’s vehicle and not stopping. My client and I were ready to go to trial. However, after discussing the case with the city prosecutor, she decided to dismiss the misdemeanor hit and run charges and allow my client to plead to a regular infraction for improper lane change.

My unfortunate client was very intoxicated when he unknowingly confessed to a crime he did not commit. My client’s friend , who had a suspended license and 2 prior DUI convictions was driving my client’s car when he was involved in a minor collision. Although my client was the passenger, he was told by his “friend” that he, my client, was the one driving. The friend told the arriving officers that my client had been driving out of fear that he would end up with a 3rd DUI if he told the truth and admitted to being the real driver. Well, once my client agreed that he had been driving, the officer naturally believed my client was the driver and did not even suspect the friend. After my client sobered up and learned that he was wrongfully arrested and charged with a DUI when he was not even the driver, no one believed him. Luckily, text messages, phone records and witness statements all corroborated my client’s cries of innocence. The Supervising District Attorney was very fair and once she saw all the exculpatory evidence I had collected, she agreed to dismiss all the charges via a court finding of not guilty and stipulate that my client was factually innocent. Factual innocence is needed to seal an arrest record because a dismissal by itself will not get an arrest of a person’s criminal record. A not guilty finding or acquittal is needed to reverse a DMV suspension. The DMV was contacted and the DUI suspension that my client had received months earlier will soon be reversed.

My client was alleged to have gotten in an argument with his girlfriend while under the influence of alcohol. The argument led to my client allegedly choking the victim, throwing her on the bed and hitting her. A conviction for this offense would have resulted in him losing his job and would have caused an obstacle to his ultimate goal of becoming an attorney. After negotiating with the city prosecutor I was able to obtain an offer that allowed my client to go to domestic battery classes for one year, after which time his plea would be withdrawn and the case dismissed. This is called “diversion”. Diversion is a great option (if the prosecutor agrees to it) in cases where the evidence against a defendant is strong and trial is not recommended, because it results in a full dismissal. The Defendant avoids a conviction and the arrest record gets permanently sealed.

My client was driving home with a friend from a restaurant where he admitted to consuming four beers over a three hour period. His preliminary alcohol screening test (“PAS) indicated a .09 BAC about 20 minutes after driving and an evidentiary breath test about 50 minutes after driving indicated a .10 BAC. The City Prosecutor refused to reduce or dismiss the DUI charges even though I was able to show the breath test machine was reading almost 10 percent high during the days surrounding the time my client took the breath test and that strong evidence supported a rising blood alcohol defense. We set the case for trial and presented a Toxicologist and eye witness testimony from the friend. The officer testified that my client exhibited physical signs of being intoxicated and that he did not perform the field sobriety tests satisfactorily. The jury came back with a unanimous verdict of NOT GUILTY on both DUI counts (VC 23152(a) and 23152(b). As a result of the acquittal, I was able to get the DMV to reverse a suspension that was unfairly imposed months earlier.

My client was stopped while driving a truck that was found to contain 1200 pounds of marijuana. This was a very serious charge due to the large amount of drugs. After a thorough investigation of the case and multiple discovery requests, I finally obtained the taped recording of my client’s alleged confession. It turned out the tape showed my client never said the incriminating statements that the officers claimed in the police report that they heard him say! The DA just assumed officers would not lie about such a thing, especially since the interview was recorded. After getting a transcript of the interview, the DA realized their case had serious problems. There was some other incriminating evidence against my client, but without the confession, the DA’s case was greatly weakened. My client did not want to go to trial and risk prison time, so I was able to get him NO JAIL offer with 3 years of probation. Since he was in the United States without any legal status, we knew that if he served any time in custody he would be at risk of immediate deportation and would be taken away from his wife and 6 year old daughter. He avoided deportation and did not do any time in jail. This case is an example of how important it is to obtain ALL of the discovery in a case and not assume anything that the police say is true without confirming it.

This was an interesting case. It is an example of how negligent the District Attorney’s Office can be. My client had a long criminal history spanning almost 30 years. Most of the convictions involved petty thefts and minor drug offenses. He also had some serious mental health issues. He was currently charged with resisting arrest and possession of methamphetamine for sale. He was initially represented by the public defender who told him he had FIVE prior strikes and the offer was 6 years (high term on count 2 doubled) and that the offer was “very fair” because the DA is willing to strike 4 of his prior strikes. The first day I visited my new client in jail he told me that there is some mistake and that he does not have 5 strikes. He complained that the public defender did not seem to believe him or listen to him. No one listened to this man because he was mentally ill and had a long criminal record. I decided to investigate his prior alleged strike convictions and as it turned out, the client was correct---he had only one prior strike and it was from 1993, NOT five! I was only able to prove the error by obtaining the plea transcripts in most of the old cases. In one of the cases where the DA alleged in the complaint as a strike prior, I learned that it was actually a co-defendant in that case who plead guilty to robbery, a strike, while my client ended up pleading to a reduced charge of petty theft. Unbelievably, there were three other cases in which the DA alleged strikes against my client in error. After several court appearances and a psychiatric evaluation, the errors were finally corrected and my client was offered a truly reasonable offer of 1 year in the county jail with 3 years probation.

My client (who was in the U.S. on an expired VISA) was driving her husband’s vehicle with her husband in the passenger seat. The car was recently stolen from a dealership and officers stopped the vehicle to investigate. The husband had a long criminal record and was being investigated for stealing numerous other vehicles, several of which my client had been observed driving. When questioned by officers about what she knew about the vehicle, my client allegedly contradicted herself, causing the investigator to suspect my client knew the car she was driving was stolen. The case was filed as a felony and the DA would not drop or even reduce the charge to a misdemeanor. I set the case for a preliminary hearing, at which time the Judge granted my motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence. It was not refilled by the DA. Because of the complete dismissal, my client will not have a criminal record and will have a chance to become legal resident.

My client embezzled over $60,000 during a 3 year period while working as an accountant in a position of trust for more than 3 years. The District Attorney initially wanted prison time because my client had no money to pay back the restitution. After 2 months of negotiating and providing proof of good character and mitigating factors, I was able to obtain a sentence of no jail time. My client is a mother of a 7 year old girl who can now stay home to raise her child instead of going to prison.

Client was charged with committing a lewd and lascivious act on a girl under the age of 14 and the Defendant was more than 10 years older than the victim (PC 288(a)). This was a very serious case with the potential of serious prison time. The evidence against my client was very strong but I knew there was a sympathetic side I could bring out in the Defendant's case. After thoroughly investigating the case and hiring a psychiatrist to evaluate my client, I was able to present mitigating factors to the prosecutor. Without having to go to trial, I was able to convince the prosecutor to allow my client to plead guilty to one count (other 3 counts were dismissed), get credit for the 60 days he was in jail, and 5 years probation with registration requirements. Although my client was charged and convicted of a serious sex offense on an 11 year old child, he only did 60 days in county jail and was then released on probation.

Client was on parole for domestic violence and was arrested for a new domestic violence charge on the same victim. New case alleged Client scratched victim during an argument in which Client was trying to leave the relationship against Victim's wishes. Client was offered by the Parole Officer a one year sentence for his parole violation unless the case was dropped. The prosecutor would not dismiss or reduce the charge even though Victim did not want prosecution and stated that the scratch was an accident and Client did not scratch her intentionally. Victim did not show up to the trial date. I argued a "Crawford" motion to exclude all statements made by the Victim to the police on the basis that it violated my Client's Sixth Amendment right to cross examine his accuser. My "Crawford" motion was granted, and the prosecutor had to dismiss the case because without the officer's testimony they had too little evidence to proceed to trial. The parole board will now revist my Client's case in two weeks and will likely lift his parole hold because the case was dismissed.

Client was charged with a DUI, driving with a .14 blood alcohol level, and a “refusal”. A conviction for this offense results in a mandatory 1 year suspension for a first time offender. Client claimed that she was followed from a bar and stopped by officers with no probable cause and that she never refused to take a blood alcohol test. My research showed that this particular bar had been a target for local law enforcement because of rowdy behavior, and that officers were harassing patrons leaving the bar.

At the DMV hearing I argued that the case should be dismissed because officers had no probable cause to stop my client. To win the case, I subpoenaed and cross examined the arresting officers. Through my cross examination, I shredded their credibility by impeaching their testimony and catching them in lies. The DMV hearing officer declared the officers’ police report to be “untrustworthy and unreliable” and found the officers had unlawfully arrested my client because they lacked any probable cause to stop her. The DMV hearing Officer dismissed (“set-aside”) the suspension and my client got her license back. The criminal court case is still pending, but as a result of the DMV set-aside, Client will have a very good chance of winning her court case or having the charges dismissed upon a motion to suppress.

Client was charged with a misdemeanor second DUI and but had over 20 prior criminal convictions, including two strikes. After carefully examining the discovery, I discovered that the police officers failed to give my client a breath or blood test within the proper time frame. I also noticed other sloppy mistakes by the police during their investigation. After pointing out the problems I uncovered in the DA's case, I was able to convince the DA to offer my client a 96 hour jail sentence (the statutory minimum sentence for a second time DUI), with the statutory minimum fine. Even though my client had a long criminal history with numerous felony convictions and two prior strikes, he only ended up having to do 96 hours in a city jail of his choice. Prior to being retained, my client was told by his Public Defender that he should be prepared to do at least 6 months to one year in county jail because of the seriousness of his prior criminal history.

Client was on felony probation for receiving stolen property. He was originally ordered to complete 60 days Caltrans as part of his plea. For two years, Client failed to report to probation and failed to complete his community service. After numerous probation violations, the judge imposed a three year suspended prison sentence on Client, warning him that if he violates probation one more time, he will immediately go to prison for the maximum sentence of 3 years. [Normally if a Probationer violates his probation after the court imposed suspended prison sentence, a judge has no discretion to recall the sentence and must impose the full prison sentence.]

After the suspended prison sentence was imposed, Client was arrested on a probation violation for driving on a suspended license and for still failing to complete his community service. The Public Defender who initially represented Client coldly stated that there was nothing she could do for him because the law mandated he now serve the 3 year prison sentence that was previously imposed but suspended. Client was advised to notify his employer and family that he would soon be transferred from the local jail to the prison to serve out his 3 year sentence. As a full time employee and sole financial supporter of his 2 young children, wife and mother, Client could not afford to go to prison.

In desperation, the family retained me as Client’s attorney. I immediately took charge of the case, compiled character references, work history and other documents to show the court that Client’s case had mitigating factors and the Court should make the unusual steps of reinstating probation and releasing client from jail. After lengthy negotiations with the court, and over the District Attorney’s persistent objections, the Judge agreed to give Client one more chance, releasing him back on probation. Instead of going to prison for 3 years, Client was immediately released from jail, placed back on probation, and ordered to complete 60 dates of community service.

Client was charged with 2 counts of robbery of a store clerk that occurred 6 months prior to the arrest. The only evidence connecting my client to the crime was a bad witness identification and my client happened to live in the area where the robbery occurred. We went to trial, where I presented several alibi witnesses and thoroughly cross examined the victim and officer. The jury acquited my client on all charges, finding there was reasonable doubt as to whether he committed the robbery.

My client was charged with felony grand theft. A strike and prison prior was also alleged. The client’s exposure was up to 7 years in prison. The DA would not dismiss the strike or prison prior and refused to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor, which is what it should have been filed as originally. At the preliminary hearing I cross examined both officers and it became clear that the client’s conduct did not rise to the level of a felony. The Judge granted my motion pursuant to Penal Code 17(b) and reduced the charge to a misdemeanor. My client will now receive informal probation with work release.

My client had two misdemeanor cases from 2006; one case involved a DUI (driving under the influence with a blood alcohol level of above .08), and the other case involved possession of meth-amphetamine and a pipe. In both cases, my client failed to appear in court for arraignment. I filed a Serna motion (alleging the denial of a speedy trial) in both cases. The court granted my motions and dismissed all the charges.

My Client was charged with felony possession for sale of marijuana. Twenty-two baggies of marijuana were found in the center console of his vehicle. He claimed that he never sold any drugs and all the marijuana was for his personal use. At first the DA refused to negotiate with me, but after my persistent coaxing and the fact that I convinced the DA that my client was a hard working young man with a nice family who had no other criminal record, I was able to get the charge amended to a misdemeanor. My client plead guilty to misdemeanor possession of marijuana and received Diversion. After his Diversion is completed, the conviction will be dismissed from his record.

My client was charged with felony theft and he had a prior strike. His bail was set at $150,000, which he had no way of paying. I did a bail reduction motion and the court reduced his bail to $50,000. He was able to obtain $5,000 and was released on bail.

My Client, a Mexican National with no legal status, was charged with felony theft; to wit, stealing $1000 worth of plant material from private property. If he got convicted of this offense he’d have been deported and would likely never have been able to obtain legal status in the United States. The DA refused to reduce the charges to a misdemeanor, but after an in-chambers conference with the Judge, the Court agreed with me that the offense was overcharged and granted my motion to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor. My client plead guilty to a misdemeanor theft and was sentenced to 30 days of work release. He was not deported and will have the possibility of applying for his citizenship in the future.

My client was charged with receiving stolen property, a felony; to wit. 13 candy bars and 5 soda cans. He was accused of accepting candy and sodas from a man that broke into a snack shop and stole cash and merchandise. My client had a prior strike from when he was a juvenile. His exposure, if convicted, was up to 6 years in prison. I thought it was ridiculous that the DA filed the charges as a felony but she refused to reconsider. I cross examined the officers at the Preliminary Hearing and showed that there was insufficient evidence to presume the client knew the food was stolen when he took it into his possession. The court dismissed the case and chastised the DA for filing such a weak and silly case.