Verdicts and Settlements
State v. RH
Client was charged with operating while intoxicated. The client was facing significantly higher insurance costs, driver’s license suspension, and probation. The case centered on an accident caused by the client, in which he fled the scene, and returned to the scene at a later time. Police officers started a DUI investigation and arrested him on suspicion of DUI and tested his BAC, which came back .18. He also failed field sobriety tests and exhibited several signs of intoxication according to the police reports. The case went to trial in which extensive caselaw research was done, and several legal arguments were made to keep out statements made by the client and certain evidence. The client was found Not Guilty of all charges.
State v. DR
Client was charged with operating while intoxicated. Client was pulled over for speeding and weaving across the center line. After an extensive investigation, including field sobriety testing, and a BAC certified chemical test of .13, the client was arrested and charged with several crimes. The client’s job was in jeopardy if she was convicted of an alcohol related offense. After a thorough discovery period, the case was set for jury trial, in which the case would be challenged on factual and legal grounds, found during our own investigation. However, the State of Indiana elected at the last moments to offer a reduced charge of reckless driving, which the client was extremely satisfied to take, thus keeping her employment intact.
State v. DB
Client pulled over for speeding just outside of his own neighborhood. Client was new to town and finishing up medical residency as a surgeon at Indianapolis area hospitals. He was charged with Operating While Intoxicated, and after a further police investigation tested .13 BAC. Not desiring to settle on a standard plea, we set out looking for scientific and technical facts that would help our case and arguments. Based on the facts of the case we were able to convince the prosecution we had a legitimate chance to beat the case in a trial. The State agreed and gave the client an offer to reckless driving. The non-alcohol offense for which the client admitted, allowed him to continue his career in medicine without paying exorbitant malpractice insurance fees, and having to sit in front of a board to further explain his character.
State v. WH
Client was pulled over for speeding, after leaving a concert. He was investigated and prosecuted for Operating While Intoxicated and tested .10 on a certified BAC instrument. Given his work in heating and air conditioning maintenance, a suspension of his driving privileges and insurance requirements would cost him his employment. A family of six would suffer tremendously from such an outcome so we set out searching records of the breath test instrument in hopes to find flaws in the equipment, which would enable us to close a better deal on the case. After extensive research and discovery, we found the equipment to have calibration issues and was faulty at the time of his test. The prosecution offered a reduced charge that was not accompanied by a license suspension and the client kept his employment.
State v. RB
Client was stopped by police for speeding and crossing the center line, investigated for DUI, tested .09 BAC, and was arrested and charged with several offenses. The client had just gotten sales job out of college and was in jeopardy of losing that employment as well as moving up in other sales related employment opportunities with a conviction on his record for an alcohol offense, and increased insurance rates. Through the discovery process we poked holes in the State’s case, and convinced the prosecution of the weaknesses in their case, in order to get a reduced charge and avoid the major penalties associated with the DUI case.
State v. DT
Client was charged with a serious bodily injury battery on a child and faced 6-20 years in prison. The State had expert witnesses who examined the evidence and were influenced by the police to suspect abuse and the nature in which it occurred. Convinced our client was innocent we set out on a year and a half journey to prove just that. We took statement s from all witnesses, sifted through thousands of pages of prior medical documents, hired our own forensic expert, and tried the case to a jury over a full week’s time. Based on our investigation, there was no way our client had committed such a crime, for which an extremely overzealous detective had falsely pinned on him. We challenged at every turn the shoddy police investigation that was done, the pigeon holing of our client as the suspect, and the medical records showing prior injuries. The jury after a week of testimony and evidence took only 1 hour and 25 minutes to unanimously find our client NOT GUILTY! It truly was one of the most rewarding cases we have ever fought.
State v. SH
Client was charged with a domestic offense, and faced loss of employment as an airman reservist and years in prison. After examining the State’s case, and negotiating strenuously with the State, we were able to settle on a diversion, thus keeping the case from becoming a part of the client’s permanent record. It saved him his career and preserved a family unit at the same time.
State v. TW
Client was charged with Felony Murder after a botched robbery attempt at a liquor store. Client faced a maximum of 65 years in prison for her role in the offense. After thorough discovery, investigation, caselaw research, and tough negotiations, the murder charge was dropped and the client made an admission to the robbery. The sentence was significantly reduced, in comparison to what we would have received on the murder charge. Instead of spending what would amount to life in prison, the client will be out in time to resume a meaningful and productive life. This case was extremely gratifying to see that we could significantly reduce our client’s liability through hard work ethic, investigation, and thorough negotiations.
State v. WW
Client charged with dealing and possession offenses of controlled substances within a thousand feet of a youth program center. Client was found to be in possession of 16 individually wrapped bindles of cocaine at the time police stopped him. The case went to jury trial where the client faced up to 50 years in prison on the A felony dealing charge and possession charges. The State argued dealing could be proven by the amount and packaging the client had. We countered successfully by arguing there was no proof of dealing based on such speculative evidence. We also argued the church in question was not a youth program center for purposes of the thousand foot enhancement. We lost the latter argument, however, after several appeals the case made its way up to the Indiana Supreme Court. The client was acquitted of the dealing charges.
State v. AC
Client was charged with possession of a controlled substance, and according to police and their reports actually had it on him or under his thigh at the time of the stop, and then attempted to throw it. Some of the police testimony in trial was inconsistent with their reports and they added several pieces of evidence and testimony not found in their documents generated at, or around the time of the arrest. We challenged the police officers’ credibility and the client was found NOT GUILTY
ALL DRUG CASES
In every drug case we take, we constantly look at the alleged facts surrounding the officers stop, search, and investigation. Our goal is to hold the officer accountable for his investigation and should he make mistakes we will be there to challenge them along the way. Our understanding of search and seizure law, the cases that are most up to date and relevant to use for such constitutional challenges, makes us a formidable foe for cops and prosecutors. We will research every angle of your case, and leave no stone unturned in our quest to challenge the admission of evidence in these types of cases.
All of our cases, ranging from DUI’s to drug cases, to major felonies have been tried and challenged all over the State of Indiana. We continue the quest for new and innovative ways to challenge evidence and currently have several unique arguments lined up in all types of cases for the coming calendar year. We look forward to working on your team to fight this battle together.