You are here

Significant Cases

  • State vs. W.K. (2015)

    Order for Protection (OFP) Resolved by Mututal Agreement - By formal agreement and a contract executed between the parties, the Order for Protection (OFP) matter was resolved, without findings, and without requiring the necessity of a formal court hearing.

  • State vs. A.C. (2015)

    Acquittal by Jury of Indecent Exposure Charge - Client was charged with Indecent Exposure. Attorney Elizabeth Levine tried the case, which resulted in not guilty verdict.  The charge had significant ramifications, because the label of the crime, Indecent Exposure, would brand the client for life.  We presented video tape footage to the Jury, and persuaded the Jury that the State's main witness was unreliable.  The State lacked any evidence of their claimed misconduct and the Jury acquitted our client of all charges.

  • State vs. S.A. (2015)

    DWI Charge Dismissed - Client was charged with 4th Degree DWI, a Misdemeanor.  As a CDL holder, he faced the loss of his job, should he end up with a DWI conviction on his record.  Attorney Calvin Johnson negotiated a settlement wherein the DWI was dismissed, and client pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of Careless Driving.  As a result, client returned to his employment.

  • State vs. J.C. (2015)

    No Conviction in Juvenile 1st Degree Felony Sexual Misconduct Charge - Client, a juvenile, was charged with felony First Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct.  Taking the long-view, through working with county services, probation, therapists, and other agencies, case resulted in a statutory stay of adjudication.  Through due diligence, we were able to show the court the benefits of keeping a conviction off of client's record.  A conviction would have required predatory offender registration, marking this juvenile for life.

  • State vs. S.A. (2015)

    No Conviction on Theft Charge - Client was charged with shoplifting, a misdemeanor.  Our greatest pleasure, whether a small or big case, comes when we're able to keep a conviction off a client's record.  We entered a diversion agreement with the State, which will allow client's record to be expunged of this charge, and keep client's record clean.

  • State vs. H.A. (2015)

    Felony Assaut Charges Dismissed - Client was charged with 3rd and 5th Degree Assault, felony and misdemeanor charges.  We challenged on the issue of lack of speedy trial.  The State had earlier brought and dismissed charges, and waited over a year to re-file more serious charges.  And, by defending on issues of self-defense, together with client's willingness to stand up to the State, we succeeded in getting the case dismissed.

  • State vs. L.K. (2015)

    Felony Drug Charge Dismissed - Client was charged with felony 5th Degree Possession, Underage Drinking and Driving, and Driving without Proof of Insurance. We challenged the felony possession charge and insisted on BCA testing of the evidence.  The resulting analysis allowed us to challenge definitions of the controlled substance in question, and thereby obtain a dismissal of the felony charges, altogether.

  • State vs B.A. (2014)

    Obstucting Legal Process Charge Dismissed - Client was charged with the crime of Obstructing Legal Process, based on his refusal to provide a middle name to a police officer, when performing a follow-up interview of client's eye-witness report of a suspected burglary.  By highlighting relevant case law concerning a person's right to withhold personal information from a police officer, and by emphasizing the absurdity of punishing a citizen who is attempting to prevent a crime, we achieved a total dismissal of the charge, preserving our client's untarnished record.

  • State vs P.J. (2014)

    Client was charged with Driving After Cancellation/Inimical to Public Safety. Through our case investigation and negotiations, we were able to illustrate the State's taking of client's driving privileges as arbitrary. Client received a dismissal of the charge. Client was further able to maintain his participation with the State's Ignition Interlock program, virtually uninterrupted, and was able to avoid two potentially very serious probation violations.

  • State vs B.P. (2014)

    Attorney Elizabeth Levine negotiated a 4th Degree DWI (.15 BAC) down to a Careless Driving, due to circumstances and conditions deemed in a measure mitigating for the Prosecuting Attorney and Court. A negotiated settlement helped to preserve our client's future goals, including significant employment options.

  • State vs F.L. (2014)

    We were able to protect client's stay of adjudication even after a probation violation on conditions from charges of Assault, Underage Consumption, and Disorderly Conduct. Working with client, probation, and the court, client retained a clean record.

  • State vs F.C. (2014)

    No Conviction on Felony Drug Charge - Client was charged with two counts of felony Drugs Sale and one count of felony Drug Possession. Through investigation and significant negotiations with the County Attorney, we were able to get dismissals on both Sales counts, and a Discharge and Dismissal on the possession charge, thereby keeping our client's record clean.

  • State vs B.B. (2014)

    Felony Drug Charges Dismissed - Client was charged with two felony counts on Drug Sale and Possession. Through case investigation by our law firm, as well as legal challenges to the State's case, we were able to attain a dismissal of both counts.

  • State vs L.T. (2014)

    Client was charged with Driving After Cancellation/Inimical to Public Safety (DAC/IPS). Client was on Probation to two counties for DWI and DAC/IPS convictions within the last two years. He was potentially facing significant jail time, should he be convicted, in addition to the forfeiture of his motor vehicle. We demanded a Jury Trial and prepared for trial. Consequently, despite client's prior convictions, the Prosecutor agreed to Continuance for Dismissal. Our client did not have to plead guilty to the charge. He agreed to pay the prosecution and court costs. There was no conviction, so there were no probation violations.

  • State vs A.T. (2014)

    A 911 call was made reporting that client had been involved in a "hit and run" accident. Client was identified and later arrested for DWI, providing a .15 blood test, within two hours of the time of driving. We raised a Post Consumption defense based on client's report that she had consumed alcohol after driving, and prior to her arrest. We took the State to Trial. The Jury found the defendant not guilty on both Counts of DWI.

  • State vs O.T. (2014)

    No Conviction for Small Amount Possession Charge - Client was charged with Possession of Marijuana in a Motor Vehicle.  He faced a 30 day drivers license revocation and permanent mark of "Sale or Possession of Controlled Substance" on his driving record, if convicted.  He had no criminal history, and wanted to maintain that record.  He further faced potential sanctions to be imposed by his university.  We negotiated a Stay of Adjudication, so that there was no conviction, preserving his eligibility to receive financial student aid, and maintaining a clean criminal record, as well as a clean driving record.  He also kept his drivers license. 

  • State vs M.J. (2014)

    Felony Fleeing in a Motor Vehicle Charge Dismissed - Client was charged with Felony Fleeing a Police Officer in a Motor Vehicle, and DWI. His vehicle, valuing above $10,000 was seized upon arrest. We negotiated a stay of adjudication on the Felony Fleeing charge. The motor vehicle was returned to the client, with zero costs for towing or storage. Also, the DWI charge was amended to a Careless Driving. Client was to serve up to one year probation, and no time in jail. There were no immigration consequences as a result.

  • State vs. K.K. (2014)

    Felony Drug Charge Dismissed - Client was charged with 4th and 5th Degree Sales of a Controlled Substance and 5th Degree Possession of a Controlled Substance, all felonies. At the evidentiary hearing, Defense presented evidence that the search was likely illegal and that the State could not prove that the Defendant had intent to manufacture or sell any illegal substances. Client had an inside nursery that was not functioning. The Defense Counsel and the State wrote arguments to the Court. The Court concluded that the State lacked probable cause to charge our client. All charges were dismissed. Conclusion: possession of only 14 grams of an illegal substance, and merely possessing grow equipment, did not support probable cause to charge felony Sale of a Controlled Substance.

  • State vs G.A. (2013)

    Stay of Adjudication on Subsequent Felony Drug Charge - Client received a Stay of Adjudication for felony drug charges, on a second time around, due to the unique circumstances of his file.  A Stay of Adjudication is not normally allowed for a person’s second time being charged with a felony level drug offense.  Both cases involved felonies.

  • State vs P.S. (2013)

    Domestic Assault Charge Dismissed - We moved the Court to dismiss a Domestic Assault on the basis that there was no probable cause for the charge. In careful analysis, the Court agreed. The record established that client “pushed” the alleged victim in such a manner that she did not fall, nor sustain bodily injury.  Following the “push,” the alleged victim did not appear upset.  The Court went on to state, “Without knowing more about the circumstances surrounding Defendant’s physical contact with (alleged victim), the Court is left to speculate that the contact may have been wholly incidental and inoffensive.” Therefore, the Court concluded that there was insufficient evidence to establish that defendant intended to cause (to the alleged victim) fear of immediate bodily harm or death by the “push.”

  • State vs B.D. (2013)

    Terroristic Threats dismissed, No Conviction on Assault - Client was charged with second degree assault for brandishing a knife in front of a group of people. Client was also charged with Felony Terroristic Threats. The Terroristic Threat charge was dismissed. The client received a stay of adjudication on the assault on the second degree, with no executed jail time. He committed significant efforts in changing his life for the better, and in demonstrating his willingness to be law abiding and to be a positive role model in our community, which helped toward the sucessful resolution of the criminal case..

  • State vs S.E. (2013)

    Rape Allegation Dismissed - An Order For Protection (OFP) action was brought against our client, alleging rape. The case was dismissed by agreement of the parties, no OFP issued.

  • State vs S.M. (2013)

    Order for Protection (OFP) Violation Reduced, Charges Dismissed - Client was charged with three separate complaints of Order For Protection (OFP) Violation. Client faced the threat of increased penalties due to the multiple violations. Client pleaded to one misdemeanor charge of OFP Violation, with the other two charges being dismissed. There was no executed jail time.

  • State vs Z.N. (2013)

    Domestic Assault Charge Dismissed - Client was charged with Domestic Assault and 911 Call Interference. The State accused our client, of assaulting his roommate, and interfering with an emergency call to 911. We negotiated with the prosecutor, arguing that the State's witness was not reliable, and had falsely accused our client. We tendered an Alford Plea, getting client a stay of adjudication on the 911 Interference charge and dismissal of the assault charge. Client thus was not convicted, avoided jail time, and kept his record free of these charges.

  • State vs B.A. (2013)

    Driving After Cancellation/Stay of Adjudication - Client was charged with Driving After Cancellation/Inimical to Public Safety (DAC/IPS), violation of the State's Ignition Interlock requirements, and Failure to Comply with License Plate Impoundment Order.  A settlement agreement had been reached between the parties, involving a plea to the DAC/IPS and dismissal of the other charges.  However, at the Plea/Sentencing hearing, after having heard Calvin Johnson's sentencing argument made on behalf of the client, the prosecutor amended his original recommendation, and encouraged the Court's consideration of a stay of adjudication.  As a result, client was able to keep the gross misdemeanor charge off his record, while also maintaining his driving record and driving privileges.

Pages