Jeanette D. was pulled over by the CHP as she exited a tricky portion of the 101 freeway in the San Fernando Valley. Despite performing well on all FST’s Jeanette was arrested for DUI. It was also alleged that she refused to submit to a chemical test, as is required under California law.
At trial, it became apparent that the arresting officers had exaggerated Jeanette’s performance on the FST’s. The defense was also able to show that officers deliberately lied about Jeanette refusing to submit to a chemical test.
The jury acquitted Jeanette D. of all charges.
George L. was a self-employed contractor who ran a very successful business in the San Fernando Valley. George L. was accused of stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise from a Los Angeles hardware store. George had a prior conviction for theft that was over twenty years old. In that case, George had stolen a bottle of liquor when he was a juvenile.
At trial, the defense established that the store security officers lied for professional gain. Specifically, the defense showed that store security officers received promotional incentives based on the number of arrests they made for the store. If convicted, George’s contractor’s license would have been permanently revoked.
The jury acquitted George L. of all charges.
Sergio G. was accused of robbery. It was alleged that he took a woman’s purse, jewelry, and money by force and threats of physical violence. Sergio G. was facing over 10 years in state prison if convicted.
The defense presented psychiatric evidence suggesting that Sergio did not have the requisite mental state for the crime charged. The defense also introduced mitigating evidence establishing Sergio’s long-standing history of mental illness. The crime occurred within hours of Sergio being prematurely released from a psychiatric hospital.
Sergio was sentenced to a one year live-in program where he will receive treatment for his mental illness and drug addiction. Mr. Sterling was also able to reach a disposition that did not involve Sergio being convicted of a strike offense under California’s Three Strikes law.
Christopher C. was accused of selling cocaine out of his car. The fact that Chris was being charged under the “sales” statute made him ineligible for treatment alternatives.
Defense investigation revealed that officers had completely ignored extenuating circumstances which demonstrated Chris was a severe addict. Mr. Sterling presented this information to the District Attorney who then agreed to charge Chris under the “personal use” statute.
Mr. Sterling secured program placement for Chris. Successful completion of the program will result in the dismissal of Chris’ case.
Henry U. was accused of violating the terms of his 290 registration requirements. Mr. U was a convicted sex offender, yet led a law abiding life since his conviction, which was almost 20 years old. If convicted, Mr. U. was facing over 7 years in prison.
Defense investigation revealed that officers had grossly misrepresented certain conduct. Defense also submitted evidence which inferred that law enforcement investigators summarily lied about certain allegations.
Mr. Sterling obtained a dismissal of all charges prior to jury selection.