Case Results

Case History: Our client was stopped for crossing over a line coming into a turning lane, something we all do on a daily basis. The client admitted to having two beers with dinner. The client refused to submit to a breathalyzer test and performed all field sobriety tests administered by the officer. Our client was arrested and charged with driving under the influence.

Our Defense: We focused our defense one two issues. First the State could not prove our client was over the legal limit for blood alcohol content. Second the State could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his ability to drive was substantially impaired. Through cross examination of the arresting police officer, as well as pointing to numerous facts shown on the cruiser video, the Court could not find beyond a reasonable doubt that our client was over the legal limit or that he was substantially impaired. A not guilty verdict was rendered.

Case History: Our client, the father of a child, was accused of assault by his child's maternal grandfather, for a dispute during an exchange of the child between parents.

Our Defense: We contended these allegations were simply a ploy to gain custody by one parent. The testimony of the accusing parent and grandparent were suspect and we argued this to the court. Further, the State was unable to prove any injuries to the alleged victim. In the end, our client was found not guilty at trial.

Case History: Our client had consensual sexual contact with an adult woman. The State alleged this woman did not have the mental capacity to consent and that our client new of this diminished capacity. Our client and the accuser attended the same school. Our client was in the process of applying for government jobs as a firefighter but was denied employment until the case was resolved.

Our Defense: It was our defense that this woman did in fact have the mental capacity to consent and even if she did not, our client did not know of this mental defect. We hired an expert to evaluate the case and determine the ability to consent to sexual contact. However, at trial, we did not need to call our expert to testify as we turned the State's own expert into an expert on our behalf. Essentially, the State's expert was forced to concede under our cross examination that the accuser did possess the mental capacity to consent to sex. We proved the woman did have the capacity to consent sex and our client did not know of any diminished capacity. Our client was found not guilty.

Case History: Our client was in a non-exclusive romantic relationship for several years. In early 2016, the significant other’s best friend initiated sexual conversations with our client. This escalated into sending nude pictures and increased sexually charged conversations. Shortly thereafter, our client along with the significant other, the significant other’s best friend, and a friend of our client were hanging out and drinking at the friend’s residence. While the significant other was asleep in another room, our client and the significant other’s best friend began having sex in the bedroom, while our client’s friend began recording the sexual act on a cell phone. The significant other heard the sexual encounter, barged into the bedroom, became visibly upset at the situation and punched both parties in the face. Once this occurred, the significant other’s best friend accused our client of rape in order to salvage the relationship with the best friend.

Our Defense: The State of Ohio charged our client with two counts of rape; one by force and one alleging the accuser was too intoxicated to consent to the sex act. We knew if our client was convicted of either count, it would completely destroy our client’s life and our client would likely spend decades in prison, so we immediately began investigating the background of the accuser as well as all parties present during the interaction. In addition, we filed numerous motions on our client’s behalf in order to eliminate all irrelevant and prejudicial evidence. The case progressed to trial in early 2018 where we exhibited evidence the accuser had sex with our client’s friend a few minutes prior to engaging in sexual intercourse with our client. Further, the accuser stated the sexual act with the friend was consensual, thereby negating the charge of being too intoxicated to consent. We also pointed to the video, which clearly showed a non-forcible sex act, where the accuser is heard moaning. During our cross examination of the accuser, we elicited numerous inconsistencies in the accuser’s story and we were able to attack the accuser’s credibility. After a five-day trial, the jury deliberated for approximately ten hours and could not reach a verdict. The Judge declared a mistrial.

The State of Ohio elected to bring the case again. We basically started the case over from the beginning and had to re-wind everything. Therefore, we again filed numerous motions on our client’s behalf as well as advocated on our client’s behalf at every step of the process. In addition, we investigated the backgrounds of all witnesses and performed our own independent research with the use of experts for each evidentiary item anticipated to be utilized at trial. The second rape trial was set to commence at the end of the summer 2018. Our firm tenaciously defended our client during the re-trial and focused on the video, which we were able to enhance with the use of an expert for better sound quality. Also, we again vigorously cross examined all witness, including the accuser to point out the accuser’s inconsistencies and lack of credibility. After a four-day trial and several hours of deliberating, the jury found our client not guilty.

Case History: Our client and his live in girlfriend had a toxic relationship. They also had a young child together. After a bad argument, our client's girlfriend called the police and claimed domestic violence. Our client was arrested and removed from the home. His girlfriend then immediately filed for a protective order and custody of their child.

Our Defense: The accuser had no visible injuries despite her description of forceful violence perpetrated upon her by our client. However, our client had numerous scratch marks on his body. She also had a drug addiction issue with pills. We brought to light the timing of her actions as well as the lack of injury to her and the documented injuries to our client. We were able to convince the prosecutor that the accuser was making the domestic violence claim in order to gain an advantage in a custody dispute with our client. Our client was also engaged in counseling as this child was his first and only child and he wanted to be a good father. Once we provided proof of our client's counseling sessions, the prosecutor dismissed the charges.

Case History: Our client resided in an apartment complex. Each building contained several apartments with common areas such as a laundry room. Our client was accused of confronting another tenant in the building’s laundry room. During this confrontation our client was accused of taking jewelry and money from the accuser.

Our Defense: We carefully reviewed the details of the allegation. Specifically, there were several statements, both oral and written, provided by the accuser. The details of which were not logical. As an example, the accuser did not report the matter for several days and when the incident was reported, the accuser could not identify our client. Our client and the accuser also had an amicable conversation the day after the alleged incident occurred. During this conversation, the accuser asked our client if our client saw a woman with red hair in the building the day of the incident. We found two witnesses to this conversation who were prepared to testify at trial. When the police showed up at our client’s apartment to execute the arrest they searched our client’s apartment, but did not find one item of property that belonged to the accuser. Upon our own independent research into the background of the accuser, we discovered the accuser had a history of providing false information to the government, especially as it related to immigration. We aggressively pushed the matter forward to trial. After the accuser was confronted with all the above information, the accuser decided not to pursue the matter any further and refused to attend court. Thus, the matter was dismissed.

State of Indiana, Jefferson County.

Case History: Our client was in a long-term marriage. Our client’s spouse began abusing drugs to the point of being incarcerated for drug use. The spouse’s family became heavily involved in the relationship which caused marital issues. At some point, our client and the spouse separated and eventually divorced. A custody battle occurred with the ex-spouse’s family attempting to gain custody of the children. While the kids were visiting with the ex-spouse’s family, allegations of sexual impropriety were reported against our client. 

Our Defense: Upon learning of the allegations, our client immediately retained our firm to put a plan in place to defend against the false allegations. We discovered Child Protective Services was in and out of the family’s life for quite some time. This was mainly due to the ex-spouse’s drug addiction. Our client was never alleged to be involved in any wrongdoing. All reports showed our client to be a caring, attentive parent. Our client fully cooperated with Child Protective Services when it came to the well-being of the children. The ex-spouse continually attempted to turn custody over to family members, however, our client was not in agreement. Our client always kept the children safe and protected. When the allegations were made by the ex’s family, our client was in complete disbelief. Our client knew this was a ploy for the family to gain custody while the ex was incarcerated. After several years of advocating on our client’s behalf and defending against the false allegations in a Pre-Arrest setting, our client was finally cleared. The police agreed with our position regarding the lack of evidence and the criminal investigation was closed. Our client was never arrested or charged criminally and achieved reunification with their children.    

Case History: Our client shared a child in common with another person. For years, they were able to amicably share custody of their child and work out a schedule regarding shared parenting time. The two agreed to be flexible with each other’s schedules, until our client’s ex abruptly insisted on keeping the child longer than the previously agreed upon schedule. Our client objected to the additional days, and the ex’s new spouse interfered. This ultimately resulted in our client being physically assaulted. Our client called the police to report the assault, only to discover the ex went directly to the police department at the same time to file for a protective order. The ex and the new spouse manipulated the facts and alleged our client was the aggressor.

Our Defense: After the initial meeting with our client, it was clear the allegations were completely false and our client did not do the things that were alleged. We were able to obtain police reports, 911 calls, and locate a witness to the assault. Using that information, along with the information we gathered from our own independent investigation into the accusers, we were able to fully prepare for the hearing in order to advocate on our client’s behalf. The evidence we were able to obtain clearly showed our client was the victim of not only an assault, but also to the filing of a false police report in an attempt by the ex to obtain custody of their child. At the hearing, we were able to argue our position, without even having to put our client on the witness stand. The Judge agreed with our position and dismissed the case against our client.

Case History: Our client had recently endured a tumultuous divorce and was in the middle of contested custody proceedings. During the family court proceedings, allegations were made against our client for inappropriately touching the children. The police showed up in the early morning hours, woke everyone in the household up, and began investigating the allegations criminally, which also included CPS involvement. Our client adamantly denied all allegations.

Our Defense: We immediately contacted the detective investigating the case, as well as the social worker assigned to the matter and informed them of our involvement. From that point forward, the authorities could not bully our client any longer and instead had to communicate directly with us. This was imperative because before our involvement, our client was being misinformed and taken advantage by the police and social workers investigating the case. Next, we gathered all information we could regarding the contentious divorce and our client’s ex-spouse, as well as information regarding all other parties involved. We discovered our client to be a loving parent who provided a safe environment. Our client always put the children first and only wanted what was in their best interest. We also discovered there was something “off” about the allegations and they did not make sense. As the investigation progressed, we maintained contact with the police and social workers. We continually advocated on our client’s behalf and outlined how the allegations were fabricated for an advantage in the custody proceedings. After many months of asserting our client’s innocence, CPS and the police finally agreed and dropped all charges. CPS unsubstantiated the allegations against our client and the police closed the investigation without any criminal charges being filed.