Mr. Beach’s client was accused of Strangulation (a felony with five years imprisonment maximum) and Interference with Making a Report (364 days imprisonment maximum). At trial, the evidence showed clearly that an incident occurred where Mr. Beach’s client had grabbed the victim in the chin/neck area. However, Mr. Beach established that the grab lasted between four to six seconds. The victim was never unable to breathe. Also, Mr. Beach’s client didn’t actually prevent a call to 911. This trial was to a judge, not a jury. The judge found Mr. Beach’s client Not Guilty of both Strangulation and the Interference with Making a Report charge. The judge concluded that Mr. Beach’s client had tried to strangle the victim so found him guilty of Attempted Strangulation. Attempted Strangulation is a misdemeanor – so, prison was averted.
Congratulations to Jason Mitchell on another Jury Trial Win!
Mr. Michell’s client was accused of Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana. This charge was enhanced -meaning made worse for him – because the vehicle he was operating was a ‘commercial’ vehicle. The key to the case was to challenge the evidence of intoxication. During extensive cross examination of the police witnesses, Mr. Mitchell used one officer to establish for the jury what constitutes evidence of being intoxicated by marijuana. Then, Mr. Mitchell used another officer to establish what was actually observed in his client. During his closing argument to the Jury, Mr. Mitchell connected the testimony of the two officers to convince the jury that what the prosecutor must proved for a marijuana conviction was not actually proved. The Jury quickly returned a Not Guilty verdict!
Congratulations to Ryan Lhotsky on a Jury Trial win – where the Prosecutor gave up!
Mr. Lhotsky’s client was accused of Assault 4 and Harassment. If convicted, his client faced up to a year and a half of incarceration (technically, one day less than a year and a half). At trial, the prosecutor called the alleged victim to testify. Once any witness testifies, the other attorney gets to cross examine that witness. During Mr. Lhotsky’s cross examination of the alleged victim, Mr. Lhotsky established that his client had only defended herself. The prosecutor tried to rescue his case by submitting a video of the interview of the alleged victim’s initial statement to the police. But, given how well the self-defense issue was established, the prosecutor then gave up and dismissed the case before the jury was required to render a verdict.
Congratulations to Joe Metcalfe on a brilliant legal defense that obtained a Not Guilty Verdict!
Mr. Metcalfe’s client was issued a citation by a police officer requiring the client to appear in court. However, the officer did not arrest and take Mr. Metcalfe’s client to the jail. Mr. Metcalfe’s client didn’t appear in court when he was required to do so. He was then charged with the crime of Failure to Appear. This carries up to 364 days of jail. Mr. Metcalfe found some obscure case law that indicated that if a person was never actually put in custody (formally arrested or otherwise) a subsequent failure to appear in court does not qualify for the criminal charge of Failure to Appear. At trial, Mr. Metcalfe produced that case law and proved that the facts of his case were exactly as described in the case law. Accordingly, the judge found Mr. Metcalfe’s client Not Guilty!
Congratulations to Tyler Beach on yet another Jury Trial Win!
Mr. Beach’s client was accused of Felony Assault 4 (carries up to 5 years of prison), Criminal Mischief 2 (carries up to 364 days) and Harassment (carries up to 6 months). Mr. Beach’s client was involved in an incident where a vacuum broke over a pregnant woman’s body. The best offer obtained through negotiations was to receive probation but with an agreement that Mr. Beach’s client would receive 13 months of prison if he broke any rules of probation. They went to trial instead. At trial, Mr. Beach agreed to the basic facts, but the issue was whether it was an accident or on purpose. The jury agreed that it could reasonably have been an accident. Therefore, Mr. Beach’s client was found Not Guilty.
Congratulations to Matthew Crusen on a Domestic Violence Jury Trial Win!
Mr. Crusen’s client was accused of Harassment. This charge carries up to six months of jail if convicted. Mr. Crusen’s client was eligible for the Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing program; but, he declined that option and set the case for trial. The allegations, and the evidence, were that Mr. Crusen’s client had grabbed and shoved his wife during an argument. At the trial, Mr. Crusen had his client testify. While testifying, Mr. Crusen’s client testified that he had done those things – but, he also got to explain why. Further, the alleged victim had recorded the audio of the event. Mr. Crusen used that audio recording to substantiate the offensive, humiliating, and aggressive behavior by the alleged victim. Once the jury heard the full presentation by Mr. Crusen, the jury returned a Not Guilty verdict.
Congratulations To Angus Dunlavey on Another Jury Trial Win!
Mr. Dunlavey’s client was accused of DUII – marijuana. In marijuana DUII cases it is often the testimony of the drug recognition evaluator (a police officer) that is the most important portion of the evidence. Accordingly, Mr. Dunlavey prepared a systemic evaluation of each of the tests administered by the officer.
When questioned by the prosecutor, the officer had testified that the conclusion of the evaluation was that Mr. Dunlavey’s client was impaired by cannabis (marijuana). Then, it was Mr. Dunlavey’s turn with the witness. Mr. Dunlavey examined every one of the tests individually and presented the jury with the actual range of responses that are exhibited by a normal – not impaired – person.
Although the officer had concluded that the evaluation had indicated impairment, when cross examined by Mr. Dunlavey, the officer conceded that all but one of the results of the testing was in the normal range for a non-impaired person. The only test where Mr. Dunlavey’s client was not within the normal range was that his blood pressure was high. Mr. Dunlavey pointed out to the jury that being arrested and going through an evaluation by a police officer can cause a person to be nervous and that can cause elevated blood pressure. The jury quickly returned a Not Guilty verdict.
Congratulations to Gabe Walsh on another Assault 4 and Harassment Trial Win!
Mr. Walsh’s client was accused of a domestic violence Assault 4 and Harassment. If he were to be convicted of both charges, Mr. Walsh’s client would face up to one day less than a year and a half in jail. At trial, Mr. Walsh’s theme was that the police had a preexisting narrative that led them to automatically arrest Mr. Walsh’s client and not the woman accusing him. Towards that argument, Mr. Walsh entered into evidence photos showing that his client had multiple bite marks on his body. During cross examination of the accuser Mr. Walsh confronted her with the fact that Mr. Walsh’s client had only hit her to get her off him and to stop her biting him. Mr. Walsh’s summation at closing argument was that we don’t entirely know who was the aggressor and therefore guilt beyond a reasonable doubt was never established. Accordingly, Mr. Walsh’s client was found Not Guilty of both charges.
Congratulations to Joe Metcalfe on obtaining dismissal of the case just after Jury Selection!
Mr. Metcalfe’s client was accused of Harassment. This crime carries up to six months of jail if convicted. During Mr. Metcalfe’s investigation of the case, he discovered that the initial statements of the alleged victim were not accurate and that she was unreliable as a witness. Naturally, Mr. Metcalfe declined all plea offers and proceeded to trial. One of the initial stages of a trial is the selection of who will be in the jury. This process begins with the defense attorney and then the prosecutor talking to the people who make up the ‘jury pool.’ Although the average person might not notice, it is normal that during this process that the attorneys are sounding out the members of the jury pool on the topics that the attorneys intend to argue during the trial. Once the jury selection process was completed, the case went into recess for a lunch break. During that lunch break, the prosecutor agreed to talk directly with the complaining witness. His conclusion from that conversation was that he could not overcome Mr. Metcalfe’s defense. Accordingly, when the trial resumed, the prosecutor submitted a motion to dismiss the criminal case against Mr. Metcalfe’s client.
Congratulations to Joe Metcalf on obtaining dismissal of a Measure 11 (Nearly 6 Years of Prison) Case!
Mr. Metcalf’s client was accused of swerving his car to hit head on his (now former) girlfriend with the car. The charge was Assault 2. This is one of the ‘Measure 11’ crimes. This means that if Mr. Metcalf’s client was convicted, he should receive 70 months (5.8 years) of prison (there is a way to sometimes avoid this full sentence).
By relying primarily on the investigation and evidence collected by the police (as well as Mr. Metcalf’s investigation), Mr. Metcalf convinced the prosecutor that this case should be dropped without having to subject Mr. Metcalf’s client to a trial. The marks on the car and the lack of actual injuries to the (very intoxicated at the time she made the claim) girlfriend did not support the allegation. After the prosecutor asked Mr. Metcalf to make a plea offer and Mr. Metcalf’s response was that there will not be a plea to anything, a motion to dismiss the case came from the prosecutor not long after.