We Get Results
Aggressive, Compassionate, Strategic, Trial Attorneys
Don’t be fooled by attorneys who brag about a high dismissal rate when what they are actually talking about is charges that are dismissed in exchange for a plea. No plea is a “good deal” when you are innocent. You need the best to achieve the best, and the proof is in the results.
Recent Notable Victories in Which All Charges Were Dismissed Outright – No Plea
State v. N.B. – Violation of HRO – Dismissed by Court Order (April 2023)
State v. P.S. – Violation of an HRO (Case 1) – Not Guilty (March 2023)
Client was charged with Violation of an HRO for contact he had with the protected person. Client was an elderly military veteran with significant mental health issues. The Defense contended that Client could not be held accountable for his actions because of mental illness. After repeated attempts to persuade the State to simply dismiss the case, we had bench trial and the Court agreed with the Defense and found him not guilty.
State v. P.S. – Violation of an HRO (Case 2) – Not Guilty (March 2023)
Client was again charged with a second Violation of an HRO for contact he kept having with the protected person. Client was an elderly military veteran with significant mental health issues. The Defense contended that Client could not be held accountable for his actions because of mental illness. After repeated attempts to persuade the State to simply dismiss the case, we had bench trial and the Court agreed with the Defense and found him not guilty.
State v. T.D. – Probation Violation – Dismissed by Court Order (March 2023)
Client was charged with a violation of his probation for being removed from Specialty Court. The State was seeking execution of Client’s full 64 month prison sentence. This was Client’s fourth violation. At the contested hearing, the Defense argued that someone’s failure to complete a specialty court, if due to mental health issues, was insufficient as a matter of law to support a probation violation, which requires that the violation be “knowing, voluntary, and without excuse.” The Court agreed and dismissed the probation violation.
State v. P.S. -Probation Violation – Dismissed Pre-trial (March 2023)
The State brought a probation violation when client was again charged with two new violations of an HRO. Client was an elderly military veteran with significant mental health issues. The Defense contended that Client’s actions could not amount to a violation of probation because they were the result of mental illness and therefore not “intentional, deliberate, and without excuse. When the Court sided with the defense and dismissed the two charges, the State then voluntarily dismissed the probation violation file.
Client was charged with violation of an HRO that allowed her to have contact with the protected person “regarding child related issues.” During the text exchanges, client was rude in her language, swore, and called the protected person a name. We challenged the charges on the grounds that the conduct indeed related to the children, and rude language does not constitute “harassment” as a matter of law. The Court agreed and dismissed the charge.
State v. J.M. – DWI Aggravated 3rd Degree – Dismissed by Court Order (February 2023)
Client was charged with an aggravated third degree DWI after being pulled over for speeding. Because he had a prior DWI, it was aggravated to a 3rd Degree and he was facing the mandatory minimum 30 day jail sentence if convicted. Because of the officer involved and the circumstances of the case, Mr. Cadem had a suspicion that client was pulled over merely because it was the weekend before the 4th of July holiday and client had a prior DWI. Upon investigation we learned that client’s license plate had been run by three different officers in the span of about 20 minutes. Ultimately, at an omnibus hearing we challenged the basis for the stop (speeding), and the expansion of the scope and duration of the routine traffic stop. On the second day of the hearing after the court heard our evidence that the officer had not properly calibrated or tuned his speed measuring device (radar) correctly the entire time he had it, and did not even possess the user manual, the Court ended the hearing early and dismissed the case.
J.M. v. Commissioner of Public Safety – Dismissed after Trial Verdict (February 2023)
Client has his driving privileges revoked as a result of an aggravated DWI. The case was highly contentious and ultimately, at the contested implied consent trial, we established that the officer had not ever properly calibrated his radar device and as a result, the stop was not supported by reasonable and articulable suspicion. The Court agreed and granted Client’s petition to reinstate.
State v. T. E. – Domestic Assault – Dismissed Pre-trial (February 2023)
Client was charged for domestic assault by allegation. Client’s girlfriend had taken Client’s phone away from him during an argument. When Client attempted to get the phone back, he allegedly “pushed” the alleged victim. The problem with such a case is that pushing someone, even intentionally, is not assault unless the State can prove that it was done with intent to “inflict bodily harm” or “fear of immediate bodily harm or death.” 609.2242, subd. 1(1-2). The fact that a victim felt fear is not the question. While the matter was pending, Mr. Cadem’s investigation revealed that this alleged victim was working as a prostitute, had made more than a half dozen other false reports to police, including about strangers, and that when asked about the events in question, her story completely changed, including an allegation that Client tried to run her over with his car after the incident. In the face of these facts, the prosecutor dismissed the file.
***These victories reflect recent select cases in which there was an outright dismissal of all charges in the file. They do not reflect the 100’s of cases we handle in which charges are significantly reduced by plea, receive a probation only sentence, or a stayed sentence is achieved.