People v. Elias S. (2009) Young man arrested in the shooting death of a gang related homicide. Special circumstance murder charges filed, carrying a life without parole sentence. In spite of eyewitness testimony placing him at the scene and as the shooter, defense investigation proved the wrong man had been arrested. Case dismissed.
People v. Eric D. Defendant was arrested and charged with the robbery of a woman at knifepoint, late at night, in a parking lot. The general description of the robber fit the defendant. The victim picked defendant out of a line-up prior to trial. Cross examination of the victim at trial revealed too many inconsistencies in the description of the robber compared to the defendant. Jury verdict: Not guilty.
People v. Christopher T. Defendant arrested and charged with robbery and theft resulting from shoplifting at a department store. Defendant was confronted by store security outside the store. While being escorted back inside, defendant struggled and fought to flee. Plea negotiations resulted in an admission to the theft charge and the robbery charge dismissed.
People v. Marlon A. Defendant arrested and charged with attempted rape involving a female neighbor. A nine year offer from the prosecutor was rejected. Jury trial cross examination by Mr. Ciulla revealed major inconsistencies with earlier statements given by the victim. Jury verdict: Not guilty.
People v. James B. Limo driver arrested and charged with Lewd Act Upon Child Under 14, Furnishing Narcotics To A Minor, Rape By Use Of Drugs, and Sexual Penetration By Foreign Object. Defense investigation revealed major credibility issues with the victim. All charges dismissed.
People v. Brad N. Male nurse charged with rape of a quadriplegic female patient. Issue of consent presented. Investigation revealed several differing accounts given by the victim. Cross examination at trial exposed the victim’s lack of credibility. Trial verdict: Not guilty.
People v. Ramon G. Physical therapist employed by local high school charged with sexual battery on female student track star. Defendant faced jail time, sex offense registration, and loss of license to practice. Result: All sex charges dismissed. No jail. No loss of license to practice.
People v. Alice S. Defendant, a 40 year old woman, was charged with shoplifting baby clothes from a department store. Her youngest child was 10 years old. She had been convicted of shoplifting three prior times. The prosecutor was seeking one year in jail. Investigation revealed that in each of the previous thefts, baby items were stolen. Further investigation and psychological testing revealed that defendant had suffered a traumatic birth miscarriage several years earlier and at times felt uncontrollably compelled to steal baby items. Defendant agreed to counseling and all theft charges were dismissed.
People v. Courtney K. Defendant, a high school senior, enters department store with tool to remove sensor tags from clothing. She conceals over $800 worth of clothing in large bag after removing the sensors. She was arrested exiting the store and charged with burglary (entering the store with the intent to steal) and grand theft. Background information of defendant presented to the court resulted in all charges dismissed.
People v. Jennifer S. Defendant charged with felony grand theft for unauthorized use of credit card. Loss: $16,000. Prosecutor sought 16 months state prison. Evidence of defendant’s drug addiction and unstable family history presented to court. Result: No jail.
Three Strikes Cases
People v. Marcia G. Defendant had a very long misdemeanor and felony criminal history dating back 20 years. Included in her rap sheet were two residential burglary convictions, considered “strikes”. Her new offense was stealing merchandise from a retail store. Initial offer from the prosecutor was 25 years to life. The court granted the defense motion to dismiss the “strikes” and defendant was sentenced to 16 months.
The National Trial Lawyers top 100
From the blog
Is Sexual Harassment Considered a Crime in California?
Sexual harassment is usually a civil violation punishable through monetary penalties, but some actions could cross a line and make it possible to receive criminal charges in California.