After 3 years of sitting in jail, the day finally came to have his trial. At the last minute, the State filed an emergency motion with the Supreme Court asking for the trial to be delayed while their appeal is heard on all 5 defendants. We filed a response arguing that the appeal did not apply to this defendant and therefore, his case should be severed from the appeal of the other 4 and his case be allowed to proceed to trial. The Supreme Court agreed and directed our case to proceed!
The Defendant was charged with Cruelty to Elder Person after his mother, who live with him and his brother was admitted to the hospital. After his case lingered for over a year, the we filed a Demand for Speedy Trial under the U.S. Constitution. When his case had not even been indicted for almost 2 years after his arrest, we moved to dismiss the case. Although the State weakly opposed the motion, it did nothing to fight against it and failed at every opportunity provided by the court to even file any motions or briefs arguing against a dismissal. However, the trial court refused to take action on the motion. After having to file both a Motion to Recuse the judge and a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to force the judge to act on the motion, the judge finally issued a ruling over a year later, denying the motion. We appealed the ruling and the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling stating that it did not comply with the law.
The Defendant and his girlfriend got into an argument which became physical. She called the police and they arrested him. After we began our investigation the alleged victim decided she did not want to pursue the case any further. When this was made known to the Solicitor, he dismissed the case.
The Defendant was arrested for possession marijuana. We believed the state would have a difficult time proving the case since the Defendant was not the only person who had access to where the marijuana was found. Therefore, we filed a Demand for Speedy Trial. When the deadline to try the case passed, the State dismissed the case.
After an armed robbery was committed in which the victim was murdered, the police went to talk to someone in the jail that they believed had information about the case. After giving him the impression that if he gave them some names, they would let him go home, he gave them the Defendant’s name. The police then arrested the Defendant. When we talked with the accuser, we discovered that he only gave them the Defendant’s name because he did not like the Defendant and thought by giving the police the Defendant’s name, he would get a free pass home. When he did not get to go home, he was willing to tell the truth about making up the name. After we got a sworn affidavit to all of this, we set a hearing to put it in front of the judge. When it came out that the original story that the Defendant was involved was a lie, the DA dismissed the case.
The Defendant and his girlfriend got into an argument which became physical. She called the police and said he attacked her. When the police arrived they decided to believe her, even though both said the other was the aggressor. Our investigation revealed that the evidence was more supportive of the Defendant’s version than her version and prepared the case for trial. The victim decided she did not want to be crossed examined by us on the stand and refused to cooperate further with the state. Without any witness willing to testify against the Defendant, the state dismissed the case.
The police were called to investigate possible marijuana use in a college dorm. The police knocked on the door and a male answered the door. The police could smell the odor of marijuana and the male admitted he was smoking and gave consent to search his room. The police noticed the bathroom door was closed and knocked on the door demanding the individuals inside come out. The Defendant refused at first to come out and so the police arrested her for obstruction. Since you have no duty to open the door for a warrantless search, we felt confident we would win at trial. After we contacted the police and let them know we were on the case, they took no further action in the case. After two years elapsed, the statute of limitations ran and the case is precluded from being prosecuted further.
The Defendant was arrested on drug charges. After we began to work the case, the state discovered it was missing evidence needed to prosecute and dismissed the case.
The defendant was arrested for possessing cocaine with intent to distribute. After we began investigating the case, the state decided that since the federal authorities were also prosecuting the client for similar offenses, they would drop the case.
A Worth county defendant charged with Cruelty to Children was acquitted after a 2 day trial! The Defendant was charged with Cruelty to Children and Family Violence Battery after disciplining children. The two children, ages 8 and 5, began fighting with each other as they boarded the school bus. The driver kicked them off the bus and told the Defendant to drive them to school. To punish them for fighting on the bus (something the defendant had already warned them about previously), the defendant spanked them with a belt. The older child would not hold still and ended up with scratches on his neck, although the child could not say where the scratches came from. The school claimed that both children had welts on their backs, although no welts could be seen in the photographs. A police investigator examined the children around 5:00 that evening but saw no welts or other marks, except the scratches on the older boys neck. Both children testified that they did not remember what happened that day and that they love their father. DFACS had investigated and allowed the Defendant back into the home with the children as they saw no further safety issues. After a two day trial, it took the jury only seven minutes to render a Not Guilty verdict!