[Please note: For confidentiality reasons, specific details of the cases must be omitted to protect the identity of the Clients. While attorney Ann Gottesman is dedicated to achieving the best possible results for her clients, there is no guarantee that your case will result in a dismissal, charge reduction, DMV set-aside, acquittal, probation or no incarceration. The facts of each case are different, and while Ann Gottesman has resolved many cases successfully, no attorney can guarantee a result in a particular case. Call Ann for a free consultation to discuss the facts of your unique case.]
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 revisit 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.