Victories

H.D. was married to his high school sweetheart. She had a younger cousin who accused him of sexually assaulting years before at his wife’s parent’s home. Even though there was no evidence to corroborate her allegations, the DA pushed forward with the case. We rejected the DA’s attempts to resolve the case with a plea agreement as we were confident in our defense.

At trial, we showed the jury all the Instagram likes and posts the alleged victim had made about H.D. which contradicted her testimony. His wife, her parents, and H.D.’s parents testified that he never had the opportunity to do what she was alleging. The jury found him not guilty based upon the evidence that we introduced, and this case was sealed from his record.

R.M. was stopped for driving the wrong way down a one-way road by the Denver Police Department.  He denied having consumed any alcohol that evening.  The officer asked him to do voluntary roadside maneuvers and R.M. agreed. The officer wrote in his report that R.M. failed miserably and arrested him for DUI. R.M. refused to consent to a blood draw as he didn’t understand why he was arrested since he had not consumed any alcohol.

At trial, the officer testified about how R.M. was swaying and unsteady, failed the roadside maneuvers, and was slurring his speech. We introduced some of the body cam footage to contradict the officer since it did not show him swaying, unsteady, or slurring his speech. The jury found him not guilty of DUI.

J.H. was accused of assaulting an acquaintance inside his apartment.  The alleged victim claimed that he was beaten for a lengthy period and he did have a broken nose.  J.H.’s father hired me to defend his son against these serious allegations as he felt the public defender was not doing anything.  The DA did not want to make an offer in this case given J.H. having an extensive criminal history.

We ran the alleged victim’s criminal history and learned he had a history of drug abuse and had a felony record.  We interviewed him as well and found he had some mental health issues.  At trial, the alleged victim could not keep his story straight under cross-examination.  I exploited these issues and showed the DA and the jury that his claims were not supported by any evidence and did not make any sense.  The DA’s final witness was the lead detective.  We moved for a mistrial after the detective mentioned J.H.’s prior arrest.  The judge agreed a mistrial was warranted and a new trial was set.  The DA moved to dismiss the case prior to the new trial date.

K.B. was employed as a security guard a marijuana dispensary.  He stayed at the dispensary at night to guard against intruders.  The alleged victim parked his semi-trailer in their parking lot despite many signs prohibiting parking in that area.  When K.B. tried to get the man to leave their lot, a verbal argument began.  The man claimed K.B. had pointed a pistol at him when they were arguing.  The police responded and found that K.B. was lawfully carrying a concealed pistol.

K.B. and his family hired me to defend him against these allegations.  He was adamant that he never pointed the gun at the man.  We interviewed the alleged victim, and it was quickly clear to us that he had some mental health problems.  At trial, we vigorously cross-examined him about his claims and the jury was able to see he was unstable.  The jury found him not guilty of felony menacing.

M.R. was accused of placing an ad for a free car on Craig’s list and listing his ex-girlfriend’s number on the ad.  She received numerous calls throughout the day about the car and felt M.R. had done this to harass her and retaliate against her.

M.R. denied doing this and hired me to defend him against these claims.  At trial, the DA was ill-prepared to introduce records that they believed established M.R. had placed the ad.  We successfully argued to the judge that the records should not be admitted so the jury could not view them.  The jury quickly found M.R. not guilty and the case was sealed from his record.

J.B. and his girlfriend went gambling at the casinos in Gilpin County.  They had both been drinking heavily.  A verbal argument ensued with J.B. being accused of repeatedly directing obscene language at his girlfriend.  The police overheard some of what he said so they arrested him and charged him with harassment as an act of domestic violence.

J.B. contacted me very distraught and was concerned that a domestic violence conviction would ruin his chances of being a police officer.  We refused all plea bargains as this was a case of J.B. exercising his First Amendment rights.  The jury agreed and quickly found him not guilty.  The case was sealed from his record and he was free to pursue his career in law enforcement.

B.F. and his girlfriend were in a parking lot in Aurora outside a shopping center.  The police were conducting surveillance there and found their behavior to be suspicious.  The police asked them for permission to search their car, which they both refused to provide.  The police brought in a K-9 trained to find narcotics.  The dog allegedly alerted to some packages in the rear of the car.  The officer opened a package and found a large amount of marijuana.

B.F. retained me to represent him to fight these charges as he believed the police had racially profiled him and illegally searched his car.  I emailed the DA and cited case law which showed the dog sniff did not give them probable cause to search the packages in his car.  The DA agreed and dismissed the charges against B.F. and his girlfriend.

A smoke alarm was heard coming from J.D.’s house so a neighbor called the fire department.  No one was at home so a fireman opened one of her windows to check if they could smell smoke.  They could not smell any smoke but smelled the odor of fresh marijuana.  The fire department called the Aurora Police Department who entered her home without a search warrant to turn off the smoke alarm (and to check out the marijuana grow).  Numerous marijuana plants were observed to be growing in the basement and were later seized by the police.

J.D. contacted me and was very distraught about the police entering her home when she was not present.  I emailed the DA, presented them with case law, and argued that the case should be dismissed because of the illegal, warrantless entry into her home.  The DA agreed and filed a motion to dismiss the case.  The case has been sealed from her record.

V.N. owned a clothing store in Aurora.  The alleged victim and her friend came into his store and tried on some clothing.  The victim claimed V.N. tried to kiss her and fondled her butt as she was in the changing room next to her friend.  V.N. was arrested and charged with Unlawful Sexual Contact.  V.N. contacted me and professed his innocence and demanded we go to trial.  I tried to get the DA to dismiss the case, but she pursued the case despite the alleged victim’s friend not being able to corroborate any of her story, V.N. having a wife and 3 kids, and no prior criminal history.

After the jury trial, V.N. was found not guilty and this case was sealed from his record.

H.M. was drinking at a friend’s house with some acquaintances and the alleged victim.  The next day, the alleged victim claimed he had fondled her breasts while she was on the couch.  H.M. contacted me and professed his innocence.  The DA pursued the case despite there not being any corroboration of her allegations and H.M. not having any criminal history.

At trial, I vigorously cross-examined the alleged victim, exposing many holes in her story and reasons for her to fabricate what she was claiming.  The DA moved to dismiss the case after my cross-examination as he no longer believed the victim and knew the case could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  The case was sealed from his record.

B.S. was living with a friend who had a teenage daughter.  She claimed that she had been having a consensual sexual relationship with B.S., which would have been illegal as he was more than 10 years older than her.  The police arrested B.S. and attempted an interview of him.  B.S. was having some medical problems and had to be rushed to the hospital.  At the hospital, the detective interviewed B.S. who allegedly confessed to having a sexual relationship with the alleged victim.  B.S. hired me to defend him and he denied having a relationship with the girl and denied confessing to the detective.  At trial, we cross-examined the alleged victim about numerous discrepancies in her report of what happened, her subsequent statement, and during our interview of her.  We argued that there was no evidence of the “confession” since the detective did not record it in any way, did not have anyone witness it, and did not have B.S. write a statement.  Additionally, we introduced testimony from a toxicologist that showed B.S. had been sedated and that type of sedation can cause someone to not be thinking clearly.  The jury quickly found B.S. not guilty and this case was sealed from his record.

A.R. was married to the alleged victim’s older sister.  She claimed that A.R. had repeatedly engaged in sexual activity with her despite knowing she was under the legal age of consent.  Other than her own journal entries, there was no corroboration of her allegations.  A.R. denied any sexual activity between them when he was interrogated by the police.  His wife contacted me, and I drove to Fort Morgan to meet with A.R. in jail.  A.R. was distraught about these serious allegations, losing his job due to the nature of the charges, and potential for damaging his marriage.  He demanded we take this case to trial since he was not guilty.  Throughout the pendency of the case, the DA continued to push a plea agreement, but A.R. refused all offers as we were confident in our defense.

At trial, we established that the alleged victim had a crush on A.R. and fabricated these events to try to get him into trouble after he stopped spending time with her.  The jury found him not guilty, and this case was sealed from his record.  He is still happily married.

My friend, M.P., called me one morning to explain his wife of 16 years had accused him of raping her, that he had been arrested, and was afraid his reputation in the community would be destroyed.  He maintained their contact had been completely consensual as it had been their entire marriage.  There were many problems with his wife’s claims, but the over-zealous DA relentlessly pursued the charges.  We never stopped trying to get a complete dismissal of the case to preserve his reputation. We met with her supervisor and a new DA was eventually assigned. Eventually the new DA agreed to dismiss the charges and this case was sealed from his record.

F.C. was partying at a friend’s house along with the alleged victim.  After everyone went to bed, the alleged victim claimed that she had woken up to F.C. raping her as she drifted in and out of sleep.  The DA pursued this charge despite the fact there was no corroboration of her story or allegations.

His family hired me to defend him against these profoundly serious accusations.  At trial, we introduced testimony from the nurse who had examined the alleged victim to show she did not have any injuries consistent with a forcible rape and she had some serious mental health issues.  The jury quickly found him not guilty and this case was sealed from his record.

S.T. had been casually seeing the alleged victim for a few weeks.  On the night in question, they had exchanged several text messages about how drunk he was, but she still wanted to come over to his house to see him.  When she got to his house, they went into his bedroom and he maintained they had consensual intercourse.  She left the house and claimed that he had raped her against her will.  S.T. hired me after reading former client’s reviews.  We interviewed S.T.’s roommate and his girlfriend who were home at the time of the alleged rape and heard nothing consistent with a non-consensual sexual encounter. We shared these interviews and text messages with the DA to show that the two had previously had sexual relations.  The DA ignored everything we shared with them.  We rejected the DA’s attempts to resolve the case with a plea agreement as we were confident in our defense.

At trial, we showed the jury all the text messages that the DA fought to keep out and subpoenaed his two witnesses for trial.  The jury found him not guilty based upon the evidence that we introduced, and this case was sealed from his record.

J.M. was driving a friend to the airport.  Upon coming up to a red light, she rear-ended the car in front of her.  That party called the police and Colorado State Patrol came to investigate.  J.M. was observed to be behaving strangely after the accident.  Although the trooper did not suspect alcohol use, she suspected J.M. may be intoxicated from her alprazolam prescription and arrested her for DUID.

At trial, I vigorously cross-examined the trooper about things she allegedly observed that were more consistent with a medical condition rather than intoxication from benzodiazepines.  We had J.M.’s husband testify about her medical condition and prescription for benzodiazepines.  Lastly, her psychiatrist testified about her prescription medication and medical condition.  The jury found her not guilty of DUID and not guilty of careless driving.

M.M. was a sergeant in the United States Army.  He and a friend drove to Denver to go out to bars in the LoDo area.  M.M. became extremely intoxicated, so his friend began to drive him home.  As they were leaving the parking lot, a pedestrian punched the hood of his friend’s truck.  His friend got out and a fight took place away from the truck.  Meanwhile, a Denver police officer saw the truck blocking the sidewalk and walked over to the truck.  The officer failed to ever activate his body worn camera, but claimed M.M. was in the driver’s seat, passed out.  Later the officer activated his camera and recorded how intoxicated M.M. was.

M.M. contacted me and maintained his friend was driving and he was not.  Furthermore, he needed to win this case, or he would likely be kicked out of the military. At the DMV hearing, M.M. and his friend testified that he was not driving.  The hearing officer dismissed the revocation.  At trial, they testified again that M.M. was not driving, and the officer could not explain why he never turned on his body worn camera.  We also argued that there was no possible way M.M. was driving that evening as he could barely stand up due to his intoxication.  The jury found M.M. not guilty and this case was sealed from his record.

J.M. was stopped for speeding by the Denver Police Department. He denied having consumed any alcohol that evening. The officer asked him to do voluntary roadside maneuvers and J.M. agreed. As they were beginning, J.M.’s cousin who was in the car started to get out of the car. The officer over-reacted putting his cousin into an arm bar and spinning him to the ground. The officer put his cousin in handcuffs and arrested him for obstructing a police officer. Having seen how the police treated his cousin, J.M. refused to cooperate any further and refused to submit to a chemical test.

At trial, we successfully argued that the officer could not have observed J.M. speeding and that he refused all testing because of the officer’s assault of his cousin. The jury found him not guilty of speeding and not guilty of DUI.

C.B. was a daily user of recreational marijuana. He consumed some earlier in the day and decided to drive to see the sunset at Lookout Mountain as he no longer felt impaired. On his drive home, he struck the rear of a vehicle that had stopped on the freeway to retrieve a bicycle that had fallen from another car. Tragically, the passenger in the car was killed. The police questioned C.B. about his use of marijuana and he honestly answered all their questions, agreed to roadside maneuvers, and a blood draw. His mom hired me as she did not want to put her son’s life in the hands of a public defender. The blood results showed his THC level was only 4.8 ng/ml. That was below the 5.0 ng/ml threshold for the DA to be able to argue he was driving under the influence which is necessary to substantiate the vehicular homicide charge. Nevertheless, the overzealous DA refused to dismiss the case prior to trial.

At trial, I successfully argued to the jury that C.B. was not under the influence of marijuana nor was he the proximate cause of her death. Rather, the driver of the other car was grossly negligent by stopping her car in the left lane of a freeway and this intervening cause was unforeseeable by C.B.