Recent Victories

2/2010 People v. [OMITTED]     8th District Court         

MARIJUANA POSSESSION DISMISSED BY MEDICAL DEFENSE

Client was charged with misdemeanor possession of marijuana, approximately 4 grams. Client was subjected to local drug team "knock and talk" where client was pressured to consent to a search of the home. Client admitted possessing marijuana to treat debilitating medical condition, admits as much to police, who fail to mention this reason in their police report. Though client had a valid medical condition per the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act (MMMA), client did not have a medical marijuana card at the time of the incident. The MMMA allows people in client's shoes to "prove up" the lawful purpose of the marijuana possession via testimony from a medical professional. The judge heard our medical evidence and decided that client met the multiple qualifications required to compel the court to dismiss her criminal case. Client was able to avoid reporting incident to employer and retains anonymity.

2/2010 People v. Uriah M.     9th Circuit Court          NOT GUILTY - ROBBERY

Uriah M. was charged with one count of felony unarmed robbery. His accuser claimed to be attacked by a group of young men who ambushed him and stole his iPod. He believed that my client was one of several involved in the attack, clearly remembers him as "third guy in." Client "matched the description" of one of the suspects and is apprehended with another suspect who ultimately admitted to be primary aggressor in assault (denying theft of iPod). Client was under 21 at time of incident and were promised by Judge that client would be sentenced per HYTA felony diversion and allowed to withdraw plea upon completing probation. We do not accept this deal. Day of trial, the prosecution offers a reduction to misdemeanor aggravated assault. Client would have likely gotten no further jail time and no possibility of felony conviction. Again, no deal. Client's codefendant pleads guilty to felony assault and testifies as defense witness that client was not involved in attack, but admits he lied to police during initial interview. We are helped by shaky ID by eyewitness bystanders as to how many attackers and what they looked like. Client testifies that he was walking with a friend/codefendant who brazenly performs the attack with no participation or foreknowledge from client. Both admit running from scene. Client admits initially lying to police about knowledge of the assault, admits he was scared and that he would be in trouble, felt threatened by police. Police take pictures of accuser, which show almost no injuries, are consistent with our theory of a single attacker, and hard to reconcile with accuser's tale of multiple violent attacks. It was a real nail- biter, but I think that picture was well worth 1,000 words in that jury room. Client's criminal record remains intact and he's learning to pick better friends.

1/2010 Township of Kalamazoo v. Eric O.   8th District Court            

MISDEMEANOR OWI .18 BA PLED TO CARELESS DRIVING, CIVIL INFRACTION

Eric O. was pulled over by a Township deputy and charged with operating while intoxicated (OWI) first offense, ultimately registering a .18 blood alcohol on the Datamaster. Client's sports car was pulled over late at night because the officer claimed to have observed several vehicle code violations: weaving within lane, crossing double line, etc. Luckily this jurisdiction uses a motor vehicle recorder (MVR) in the squad car and we requested the tape, which showed perfect driving, not even one swerve, no demonstrable violations of the vehicle code. Prosecutor agrees to offer reduction to driving while impaired (OWVI), a misdemeanor offense with fewer consequences than OWI. We refuse. We set the case for a suppression motion, arguing that any and all evidence gathered at the traffic stop must be suppressed because the traffic stop and seizure of my client was unconstitutional. A few minutes before our scheduled suppression motion hearing, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the charge to a civil infraction of careless driving. Client paid $250 court costs and fines, received points on his driver license, but received no criminal or alcohol- related convictions, no probation, no driver responsibility fees and no license restrictions.

12/2009 City of Kalamazoo v. Salem D.    8th District Court          NOT GUILTY - OWI

Salem D. was charged with allegedly operating while intoxicated (OWI) first offense. He admitted drinking one drink with dinner and about an hour later was involved in a car collision with another driver. Client and other driver then drive to client's nearby house. Client drinks two glasses of wine at his house while other driver remained outside. Police are called to scene to investigate accident and cite the other driver for the accident. Client smelled of alcohol, admits prior drinking and is arrested for OWI. He blew .11 on the Datamaster. The City offers us a lower offense, operating while impaired (OWVI), which is the standard offer if the BA is .14 or less and no accident (police ruled other driver at fault, waiving this rule), we counter offer with plea to infraction of careless driving. No deal. We call to stand client's coworker, housemate, girlfriend and client who establish detailed timeline of client's evening and drinking. The prosecution called the "other driver" to the stand and he admits on cross examination that client did not smell of alcohol, and drove without visible impairment. The jury of 6 voted to acquit on the single count, client has since moved out of state free and clear of any convictions, probation, mandatory counseling, and driver responsibility fees.

12/2008 People v. Keyth W.     9th Circuit Court          FELONY RESISTING AND OBSTRUCTING CORRECTIONAL OFFICER

Keyth W. was charged with felony resisting and obstructing two Kalamazoo Co. deputy sheriffs while serving an unrelated jail sentence in the Kalamazoo County Jail. Client is epileptic and due to a lack of medication, began having seizures. After one particular seizure, he was evacuated from his six man cell by two guards. The two guards helped client transfer from wheelchair to floor mat and client physically resisted their efforts by fighting them. One of the guards was injured when he punched her in the face, breaking her nose. Client is not charged for two weeks, but then allegedly admitted he punched guard and "got away with it" to another inmate who decides to become a jailhouse snitch. The prosecution charges client with two felony counts and judge sets astronomical bond due to client's prior record, keeping him in custody for over 4 months pending a trial date. Client is indigent and court gives me limited budget to find and hire an expert medical witness to testify at jury trial. I found a professor of neurology who told the jury that client, 10- 15 minutes after a seizure, was in a "post ictal" state and could not have willfully and consciously made fist with hand and punched guard with requisite criminal intent. Upon reading the pre- trial report generated by the neurologist, prosecution offers client plead no contest to the lesser (non injury) felony with no further jail time, no probation. Client was conceivably facing a prison sentence and refused to plead no contest with no further sentence. The prosecution cannot produce any contrary medical expert testimony and relies on snitch testimony to show that client knew what he was doing when he did it. The hard part of this case was not the expert testimony, which heavily favored our theory, but was the client himself. Keyth had little "jury appeal" and mouthed off to me as well as the judge in front of jury several times. The jury acquitted my client of a violent felony notwithstanding that most of them would have crossed the street upon sight of him, it was AMAZING.

Contact Us Online today!
Or Call Now! - 269-290-5606