Recent Case Results


Commonwealth of Kentucky, Fayette County

No Charges Filed/No Arrest

Case History: Our client met a person through an online dating site. The two began a relationship, however, after a short period of time the relationship was not working out. One evening, when the two were at our client’s home, our client told the accuser the relationship was over and could not continue any further as they were not compatible. When our client requested the accuser leave our client’s home so they could go their separate ways, the accuser called the police and alleged forcible rape by our client.

Our Defense: Our client was an upstanding member of the community and such an allegation would destroy both our client’s employment and personal life. We knew we had to clear our client’s name immediately, so we began looking into the background of the accuser. We quickly discovered the accuser has a history of making false allegations. In addition, the accuser worked in the adult film industry prior to meeting our client and was attempting to extort our client for money in order to quit such industry and gain financial stability. Further, we discovered several inconsistencies in the accuser’s story, which we were able to prove via text messages, voicemails, and emails. The accuser’s actions were completely inconsistent with that of someone claiming to be a “victim” of a horrendous sexual act. When we presented our findings to the detective investigating the case, the detective had no choice but to close the investigation without filing any criminal charges and clear our client’s name.

Criminal Mischief

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Fayette County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client had an ongoing feud with a neighbor. One day the neighbor called the police and claimed our client destroyed the neighbor’s property. Our client maintained the neighbor fabricated the entire story.

Our Defense: As soon as we began looking into the details of the case, we discovered many inconsistencies in the neighbor’s story. The neighbor claimed to have video footage of our client destroying the property. However, when we pressed the issue, the video was never produced. Instead, our client had evidence of the neighbor destroying our client’s vehicles and trespassing onto our client’s property. Further, our client was out of town on the date of the alleged incident. Basically, we were able to discredit every position taken by the neighbor. Once we presented our findings to the Commonwealth, they had no choice but to dismiss the case.


State of Ohio, Clermont County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was accused of having sexual intercourse with a minor. Due to age, the minor was unable to consent. The minor’s parents discovered their child had some sort of interaction with our client and contacted the police. Our client immediately contacted us before speaking with the police.

Our Defense: We defended on many fronts. First, the State could not prove a sexual act occurred, except through the accuser’s testimony. There were substantial communications between our client and the accuser, however, none of the communication confirmed sexual activity. The State also did not have any DNA evidence. Further, we performed a significant amount of research regarding the accuser’s background and discovered the accuser had a history of claiming to be an adult on social media. Our client believed the accuser was the age of consent based upon the accuser’s assurances to our client. After numerous discussions with the prosecutor, we were able to get the State to concede the accuser claimed to be of age and also told our client such. Based upon the evidence we presented to the prosecutor, on the morning of trial, the State decided to dismiss the case in its entirety.


State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Case Dismissed after Trial

Case History: Our client’s spouse made claims of domestic violence against our client, however, our client disputed all allegations. The spouse filed for a protective order. If this protective order was granted, our client’s life would have been severely devastated. Our client’s home, business, and interactions with our client’s children were in jeopardy.

Our Defense: The accuser testified to numerous things and mainly accused our client of being a “bad person” without being able to provide any specific details. During our cross examination of the accuser, the accuser was forced to admit the filing of the protective order was to gain an advantage in potential divorce and custody proceedings. We were also able to expose all of the inconsistencies in the accuser’s story. The accuser’s credibility was completely destroyed on cross examination and the Judge dismissed the matter without our client having to put on any proof.


State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was involved in a shooting incident in front of our client’s own home. Our client and our client’s spouse were driving home from grocery shopping. On the drive home, a car swerved and almost collided into them. Words were spoken between our client and the other driver. The driver then followed our client home without our client realizing such. Our client and our client’s spouse were putting away groceries when our client noticed the other driver driving down his cul-de-sac. Our client’s spouse called 911 while our client retrieved a revolver for protection. Our client asserted the driver shot at our client first and our client then returned fire with two shots. Even though our client’s spouse called 911, the driver was able to make contact with the police first. The police alleged the driver did not fire at our client and charged our client with felonious assault. Our client contacted us immediately upon learning of the charges.

Our Defense: It was undisputed our client fired a firearm two separate times, however, it was in self-defense. Our client definitely had a revolver with two fired brass inside. We immediately began performing an independent investigation into the case. We found five different neighbors/witnesses who stated three shots were fired during the altercation. We also discovered the driver’s shirt contained gunshot residue on the sleeves and chest areas of the shirt. The State was trying to insinuate the gunshot residue was from our client’s firearm. However, after researching journals and articles on gunshot residue, the lead coroner from Hamilton County had written an article about how far (and limited) gunshot residue could travel; thus, destroying the State’s theory. Further, the accuser had a lengthy criminal record including serving several prison sentences as well as a history of illegal firearm ownership. At trial, the State dismissed its case over the objection of the driver/accuser.


State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was accused of threatening and stalking our client’s pregnant paramour. Our client and the paramour worked together at the same company and in the same department. Our client’s job was in jeopardy if the allegation was successful. Our client denied any threatening, abuse, or stalking ever occurred.

Our Defense: We obtained all electronic communications between the parties, mostly consisting of text messages. While there were disagreements between them, there was no evidence of any threats or harassment. Instead, we discovered our client was attempting to end the relationship. This was not acceptable to the accuser and the allegations arose immediately after our client’s attempts to disengage. Further, we obtained information the accuser was not truly pregnant and was only making such a statement to gain an advantage in court. When we pressed the issue for proof of pregnancy, the accuser dismissed the petition.


Commonwealth of Kentucky, Scott County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client and our client’s paramour had a disagreement. After the disagreement, the paramour alleged domestic violence and sought a protective order against our client. Initially, the paramour had our client removed from our client’s own home. Our client completely denied any domestic violence ever occurred.

Our Defense: We began digging into the accuser’s background and discovered the accuser had a significant history of substance abuse including several unsuccessful attempts at treatment. Once our client re-gained access to the home, our client discovered several items were missing. Our defense was simple. The accuser relapsed and was attempted to obtain drugs and/or drug money. When our client refused to assist in this regard, the accuser became angry and made the allegations. Once the accuser had our client removed from the home, the accuser then stole our client’s valuable items in order to obtain drugs. We asserted the police were complicit in both the theft and the accuser obtaining drugs. The matter was dismissed on the morning of trial.


State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Not Guilty

Case History: It was alleged our client threatened another person with a gun. The accuser was at our client’s friend’s home. The person was irate and demanding money from our client’s friend for something related to car repairs. The accuser threatened our client’s friend and the friend’s family. Our client arrived at the home to pick the friend up for work. Our client walked up to the door of the home and told the accuser to go away and leave everyone alone. Our client is a person of large stature and upon our client’s request, the accuser decided leave and proceeded to drive away. However, the accuser later called the police and claimed to be threatened with a gun by our client.

Our Defense: We had three witnesses testify the accuser was hysterical and out of control. The accuser was not only screaming obscenities, but the accuser was also kicking our client’s friend’s front door. The witnesses testified our client took control of the situation through a demeanor that was stern but calm when our client requested the accuser leave. All three testified our client did not have a gun and never showed a gun. Our client was wearing gym shorts and a tee shirt. Further, our client was headed to work and it was not reasonable for our client to have a gun at the time. On cross examination, the accuser’s credibility was destroyed. There were numerous inconsistencies in the accuser’s testimony. The accuser admitted to calling family members who were supposed to be on their way to handle the dispute (implying a threat). However, the accuser’s testimony on the witness stand regarding the gun was substantially different than the 911 recording. The judge determined the accuser was not credible and found our client Not Guilty.

Child Sexual Abuse & Domestic Violence

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Fayette County

Case Dismissed; No Criminal Charges Filed; No Arrest

Case History: Our client played an active role in the lives of our client’s children and grandchildren. Our client was even responsible for providing transportation in order for the grandchildren to visit with their parents. Our client was a proud grandparent and being a grandparent was a very important part of our client’s life. One day, after a disagreement occurred between the parents of one of our client’s grandchildren, our client was accused of sexually abusing one of the grandchildren. Our client was in complete disbelief and heartbroken over the allegations. Our client knew the allegations were completely false and were instead the product of one of the parents attempting to gain an upper hand in an ongoing custody battle. The parent of the child requested an emergency protective order/domestic violence order based on the allegations to prevent our client from having any access to the child. Not only was our client threatened with the possibility of criminal charges, but our client was also forced to defend against the allegations in a family court emergency protective/domestic violence hearing.

Our Defense: We immediately began building a wall of protection around our client. Once we notified all agencies of our involvement and cut-off access to our client, we began researching the background of the parent who made the allegations on behalf of the minor child and filed the protective order against our client. We soon discovered the parent was very familiar with the court system. In fact, on several past occasions, the parent made similar allegations on behalf of other children and filed the same paperwork in multiple jurisdictions against other alleged perpetrators. It appeared the parent knew exactly how to manipulate the system. We further discovered the allegations arose immediately after the parent did not get what the parent requested in the custody case. In addition, there was a major procedural problem with jurisdiction. The court in which the parent filed in did not have authority to preside over the matter. The court could not exert jurisdiction over our client and we refused to concede jurisdiction because the case was filed in the wrong forum. When the matter came for hearing, we argued to the judge that our client must be dismissed from the case because the court lacked jurisdiction. We further pointed out that the parent was far more experienced in these matters than portrayed. We presented the multiple filings from other jurisdictions as well as the coincidences with the custody case. Finally, our client’s position never changed. Our client maintained the fact that the allegations were completely false and nothing improper ever occurred. On the other hand, the parent/accuser’s story changed numerous times. Basically, each time we successfully disputed one of the facts, the parent would then change the story. Based upon the numerous inconsistencies, the accuser’s complete lack of credibility, and the procedural defect with jurisdiction, the judge had no choice but to agree with our assertions and dismiss the case. Not only was the domestic violence/protective order dismissed, but our client was not arrested or criminally charged.


Commonwealth of Kentucky, Fayette County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was in an on and off relationship with another person. During one of their “off” times, the other person filed a protection order against our client. Our client disagreed with the allegations, however, since the relationship was over, our client agreed to stay away from the accuser for a short period of time and part ways for good. At some point, the accuser began contacting our client again and the two discussed plans to reunite. However, later when the accuser was angry at our client, the accuser filed a police report claiming our client violated the stay away order. Our client was subsequently arrested for the alleged violation.

Our Defense: The night our client was arrested, it was actually the accuser who called to notify our office of the arrest. The accuser was also trying to bail our client out of jail. When we discovered the accuser was trying to come to our client’s rescue, we knew there was much more to the situation. When we began reviewing the discovery, we found the allegations did not make sense. The Commonwealth would not be able to prove our client violated the protection order. There was no evidence our client contacted the accuser or violated the terms of the stay away order. Further, the alleged contact could not be traced to our client. The police report even stated the messages received by the accuser were from an unknown person and an unknown number with no identifying information. This coupled with the fact the accuser was coming to our client’s aid and contacting our office indicating a desire to rekindle the relationship showed the allegations were false. The accuser even admitted the allegations were made out of anger. When we presented the facts to the prosecutor and explained the two wanted to become romantically involved again, the prosecutor agreed with our position and dismissed the charges against our client.

Domestic Violence

State of Ohio, City of Cincinnati

Not Guilty after Trial

Case History: Our client’s teenage child was exhibiting behavioral issues. Our client picked up the teen for visitation and a verbal argument ensued regarding the teen’s disrespectful behavior and not abiding by rules. This argument was occurring in a small vehicle. During the argument the teen was struck in the face.

Our Defense: Our position was the strike was purely accidental. Both our client and the teen were in a small car and our client was shifting gears manually. While they were arguing, our client’s right hand was pointing toward the teen. When our client’s right hand was shifting gears, our client’s hand lifted up off the gear shift knob and at the same time the teen was starting to lean forward which caused the teen to be struck in the face. A major part of our defense centered on the fact that our client was a calm, reasonable individual and obviously felt horrible for the incident. Our client was extremely consistent and provided several statements indicating the incident was purely an accident. On the other hand, our client’s teenage child appeared like a spoiled, manipulative liar (at the time the teen wanted to live with our client’s ex-spouse because our client was the disciplinarian). We filed motions as well as open records requests for all police records. In response to the requests, the police report we received identified that the teen initially stated the strike was an accident. Upon our cross examination during trial, the teen denied ever making the statement and instead claimed it was completely fabricated by the police. Based on the credibility of the witnesses, including the teen’s lack of credibility, the judge found our client “Not Guilty”.

Harboring Dogs Without a License and Failure to Register Dogs

State of Ohio, Warren County

Not Guilty after Trial

Case History: Our client had a longstanding dispute with a neighbor that was a government official. Our client was properly registered as a dog rescue and in compliance with all regulations regarding such. However, our client’s neighbor contacted the local police attempting to have our client entangled with the law about the rescued dogs. Our client was cited for harboring dogs without a license as well as failing to register the dogs under his current care.

Our Defense: The original defense rested in the wording of the statutes with which our client was charged. Our client was not required to obtain a license to harbor dogs nor was our client required to register the dogs. We fully intended to put forth facts at trial to support both of these arguments. However, due to cross examination of the State’s witnesses at trial, the State did not have enough evidence to support its own allegations. At the close of the State’s case, we made a motion to the judge for the case to be dismissed against our client without our client having to put forth any evidence. The motion was granted and a “Not Guilty” verdict was entered in our client’s favor.

Domestic Violence

State of Ohio, Warren County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client and our client’s live-in significant other were on our client’s property engaged in a physical altercation. The police were called by a neighbor and when the police arrived they witnessed the physical altercation. Our client was arrested and charged with domestic violence.

Our Defense: Our client had a poor case from a factual standpoint. The police (along with our client’s neighbors) witnessed a fist fight occurring in our client’s front yard. Neither our client nor our client’s significant other were fighting from a defensive position. Our client did not have a criminal record and neither did the significant other. Neither party desired to pursue the matter, however, the State had perfect evidence factually and was interested in sending a message to our client and the public. Our only option to stay on the offensive with the State was to challenge the constitutionality of the domestic violence statute in this case. Ohio’s domestic violence statute requires the parties to be living together as a spouse of the other. Ohio law, at that time, precluded two people from the same sex from being married to each other. Therefore, our argument was that the parties were legally precluded from living together as a spouse of the other. After asserting our legal argument and suggesting the matter was ripe for dismissal based upon our client’s lack of record coupled with our client being arrested on the day of the altercation, the State agreed to dismiss the matter.

Sex Crime Attorneys in Lexington

At Bleile & Dawson, we take pride in fighting for our clients' right to justice and fair treatment under law, and over the course of our careers as Ohio and Kentucky criminal defense attorneys, we have helped many people to avoid the harsh consequences of a criminal conviction. With a long track record of winning acquittals, dismissals and favorable plea bargains for our clients, we have proven our ability to get results. Take a moment now to read through this list of some of our results, and then contact our office for a free case evaluation and to learn what you can expect in your own situation.

Child Sexual Abuse

Commonwealth of Kentucky/ The Cabinet (DCBS), Boone County

Allegations Found Unsubstantiated After Appeal

Case History: Our client was accused of inappropriately touching a young family member. It was common for our client to babysit the accuser on a regular basis. The accuser made the allegation after getting into trouble by our client for poor behavior. Shortly after our client punished the accuser and created new rules, the allegation arose. Due to the seriousness of the allegations, the Cabinet began an investigation which also included our client’s own children. Subsequently, the Cabinet substantiated the findings of sexual abuse against our client.

Our Defense: We immediately informed the Cabinet (CPS) of our involvement in the case and prevented any further contact with our client or our client’s family. We reviewed the Cabinet’s findings and immediately realized the allegations should never have been substantiated in the first place. We also discovered the accuser had a horrible history of manipulating situations and being untruthful. Based on our discoveries, we decided to appeal the Cabinet’s finding. In the appeal, we pointed out the findings were based on an allegation alone without any corroborating evidence. Our client was never provided any details of the allegations and instead was manipulated and bullied by the social workers investigating the case. The actions taken by the Cabinet during the investigation were inappropriate and violated our client’s rights. Our client was disrespected by those investigating the case and severely misinformed to the point of being intentionally lied to. At all times, our client was adamant that nothing inappropriate occurred and the allegation was completely false. The way our client was treated during the investigation and the subsequent substantiation finding without any evidence completely destroyed my client’s family. We thoroughly walked through the entire case and pointed out all of the flaws in the Cabinet’s poor handling of the matter. After we submitted the appeal on behalf of our client and continued discussions with counsel for the Department for Community Based Services, it was determined the findings of sexual abuse should not have been substantiated. The action was dismissed and the findings were reversed.

Domestic Violence Criminal Case and Domestic Violence Protective Order

State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Not Guilty Verdict after a Trial (Criminal Case)

Dismissal after a Trial (Civil Protective Order Case)

Case History: Our client was in a relationship with a woman for several years. They would often break up and then get back together. The accuser was making demands of our client to get married when our client was interested in severing the relationship completely. Initially the accuser alleged our client assaulted her in his truck by slamming her face into the dash of the truck. Approximately one week after this allegation, the accuser alleged our client forced her to perform oral sex on him. The accuser then filed a domestic violence civil protection order against our client making allegations of forced oral sex as well as assault. Not only were criminal charges brought against our client based on the assault allegations, but our client was also forced to defend himself in a civil setting for the protective order.

Our Defense: At both trials we employed a two prong defense. First, the accuser had a motive to lie. Second, the actions of the accuser, after the alleged domestic violence and sexual assault, were not actions of a person who was a victim of a crime. Basically, the accuser's text messages, emails, phone calls and other electronic communications were gathered. Our team created a timeline of all the communication. After that, we inserted the timeline of her allegations. When a comparison of the timelines was made, a person who was battered or sexually assaulted would not make the type of statements the accuser made. Her conduct was inconsistent with her words. Also, we exposed a motive for the accuser to lie. If the accuser was found to be a victim of domestic violence, she was eligible for certain Federal benefits that she was actively seeking. Finally, after searching through numerous documents for our client, we discovered that we could prove the truck where the alleged domestic violence occurred, was actually not running and in the repair shop. She told a story about being beaten in a vehicle that was actually not running at the time and was instead being repaired. After both trials, our client was fully exonerated as he was found not guilty of the crime of domestic violence and the domestic violence civil protective order was dismissed.

Rape, Incest, Sexual Abuse of a Minor

Commonwealth of Kentucky / The Cabinet (DCBS), Kenton County

Trial, Decision of Judge to Dismiss Our Client from the Case

Case History: Our client was accused of molesting his minor daughter over a period of ten years. The Kentucky Cabinet filed Dependency, Neglect and Abuse charges against our client specifically alleging sexual abuse of the child. The Cabinet was encouraging our client to make an admission to the abuse finding. We refused to agree to any finding against our client and proceeded to trial.

Our Defense: We showed how the child gave conflicting stories that were against basic principles of human sexuality. Basically, her stories did not make any sense. We also showed the Court how the child had a propensity to lie often to either gain attention or in an attempt to exculpate herself from wrongdoing. In this case, it was obvious both motives applied. During trial, at the end of the presentation of evidence by the Commonwealth/The Cabinet, our client was dismissed from the case. It was determined that the child did have behavioral issues but these issues were not in any way caused by our client.

Rape, Gross Sexual Abuse

State of Ohio, Warren County

Investigation Terminated, No Arrest of Our Client

Case History: Our client was accused of having sex with his 16 year old daughter. This sexual abuse was supposed to have occurred since the child was 6 years old. This allegation arose in Kentucky based upon actions that supposedly happened in Warren County, Ohio.

Our Defense: Our client denied any such act or acts ever occurred. When the police investigated, we requested they look at other evidence first before turning to our client. Specifically, our client had another daughter who was two years younger than the accuser. This daughter stated her father was never improper with her and was a loving father (who she missed because she was separated from her father because of these allegations). She also said she never witnessed anything improper between her father and sister. Our client's wife also had two children about the same age who also denied anything improper between themselves and our client. They also denied ever seeing anything improper. We also gave the police this child's mental health history, criminal history and educational history. Those histories showed a child who has engaged in delinquent behaviors in the past and lacks credibility. The police refused to press charges or continue any further investigation of our client.

Domestic Violence Emergency Protective Order

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Boone County


Case History: Our client found out his wife was engaging in extra marital activity. He was upset and threatened to terminate the relationship and immediately divide up all assets. Most property, including their house and land, was his prior to marriage and therefore she was not entitled to those assets. There was bad feelings between them for about a week when he informed her he wanted to separate and end the marriage. The next day she filed for an emergency protective order based upon domestic violence which allowed her to keep his personal property while forcing him to defend himself against untrue allegations.

Our Defense: We destroyed his wife's credibility by showing her actions were not those of someone who was the victim of domestic violence. She had absolutely no injuries and continually attempted to contact our client proving she did not feel threatened or afraid. She sent several text messages that conflicted with her account of the events. She did not report any violence to the police, anyone else of authority, or even her own family or friends. Her Facebook postings were contrary to her allegations as well. We also showed how she was manipulating the justice system for an advantage in the upcoming divorce case. The case was dismissed and our client went back to his home and property.

Prohibited Use of Electronic Communications System to Procure Minor

Commonwealth of Kentucky, McCracken County

Not Guilty

Case History- Our client was a resident of a western state, far from McCracken County, Kentucky, and was accused of soliciting a minor for sex via the internet. He was arrested at his home in the western U.S. and transported to McCracken County to face criminal charges as well as sex offender registration. His life was turned upside down in a moment. However, after retaining our firm, our client was released on bond and subsequently vindicated of any wrongdoing after a Not Guilty verdict was rendered at trial.

Our Defense- Our firm offered a two prong strategy to defend our client. First, we set out to show our client did not attempt to solicit a minor from thousands of miles away. Second, we attacked the information the Commonwealth presented regarding internet communications. We used our technical knowledge of computers and the internet to successfully turn the Commonwealth's "expert" into an expert for the Defendant. We did not even require the use of our own computer expert as the Commonwealth's expert was instead used to the advantage of our client. A Not Guilty verdict was rendered without our client even calling a single witness in his defense.

Felonious Assault

State of Ohio, Hamilton County


Case History- Our client was accused of beating a person with a baseball bat to the point of breaking the person's arm. Our client was a young man who had minimal contacts with the law. He was employed full time, working hard to secure both a trade and a future for himself. After getting our client out on bond, he was able to keep his home and employment during the pendency of the case. After the case against him was dismissed, his life returned to that of a normal young man trying to achieve the American Dream.

Our Defense- Our firm has a great relationship with both the prosecutor and police agency. There were several odd discrepancies we were able to point out regarding the accuser's story. Specifically, there was no motive for our client to get into an altercation with the accuser as the two do not know each other. Our client was also substantially smaller in stature than the accuser. We did convey to the police and prosecutor that our client caught the accuser breaking into our client's home. Our client heard someone at his door and believed it was his girlfriend. He opened the door to find the accuser on his knees with a butter knife trying to pry the lock open. The accuser immediately dropped the knife and fled. The end of the butter knife was bent from being wedged in the door. We kept the knife and photographed the door showing not only pry marks, but also the size and shape of the marks, including the consistency to the bend in the knife. When the accuser was questioned about the knife, his story seemed a bit far fetched and proved unlikely once we investigated his explanation. The prosecutor and police agreed to dismiss all charges against our client.


State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Not Guilty

Case History- Our client provided security for property containing large amounts of valuable scrap metal. The vast responsibility required our client to live on the property in order to adequately safeguard it. Our client caught a female stealing various items. He obtained her name and address, retrieved all the items from her, and then released her with a warning to never return. She went home, called the police, and claimed he raped her. We took the matter to trial and obtained a Not Guilty verdict.

Our Defense- The defense for this case was simple and straight forward. The accuser had multiple versions of the story which varied significantly. Her actions as a "rape victim" also did not make sense. We proved she was a thief and drug addict who had a motive to lie. She was caught red handed stealing. If our client called the police she would go to jail. If she called the police first, and changed herself from a criminal to a "victim" then our client would go to jail. If our client went to jail, she would also have unfettered access to the scrap materials to support her drug habit. The accuser testified she felt threatened by our client to the point he was going to kill her, yet she returned to the property and began vandalizing it prior to calling the police. We destroyed her credibility when we verified she was a thief, a liar, a drug addict, and a system user.

Kidnapping, Aggravated Burglary, Aggravated Robbery

State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Not Guilty

Case History- Our client was the driver of a car containing three additional passengers. One of the passengers requested our client drive him to a friend's apartment. Once at the apartment, two occupants exited the vehicle to meet the friend. Our client never exited the car. When the two passengers came back to the vehicle they were angry. Upon leaving the apartment complex, they passed a police car and then a second police car that turned around and attempted to stop our client's vehicle. The police video showed the car began to pull over but then continued in its course. The three passengers fled the vehicle. Our client eventually fled the vehicle as the last to exit. Our client was apprehended less than 50 yards away. He had no prior criminal record. Our client, as well as three co-defendants, were arrested for allegedly robbing and kidnapping the "friend" and then burglarizing his apartment. The case was taken to trial and a Not Guilty verdict was rendered on all counts.

Our Defense- It was discovered the "friend's" girlfriend called the police and reported her boyfriend was being robbed in the parking lot. When the police arrived, she stated men came into her apartment after robbing her boyfriend outside and then ransacked the apartment looking for money while holding her, her children and her boyfriend hostage for at least 25-30 minutes. It was discovered that her boyfriend was a drug dealer with a long history of convictions. We filed motions to obtain the 911 recordings and police logs showing all police activity relating to her 911 call. The 911 call came into dispatch at 2:58 a.m. (when our client's friends were allegedly robbing her boyfriend in the parking lot). The police were pursuing our client at 3:04 a.m. This meant that if her allegations were true, the robbery in the parking lot, the breaking into her apartment, the ransacking of her apartment, and the fleeing all had to occur within six minutes. However, she reported to the police that it took a minimum of 25 to 30 minutes. In addition, her story changed dramatically. She initially claimed one of the "robbers" stole $50.00 from her chest of drawers. Later she claimed they stole about $3,600.00 from her. The police did not discover property belonging to the accusers in the car or on any of the defendants. There was evidence seized from the car and our client that at trial we proved was in fact our client's own property. Her credibility was destroyed at trial. It was also discovered at trial that the two passengers were involved in a drug transaction with the "boyfriend." The "boyfriend" stole their money and hid in the apartment. The police were called to make all four men leave the complex. Our client had absolutely nothing to do with the drug transaction and never left his vehicle. Our client was vindicated and continues to have an unblemished criminal record.

Prohibited Use of Electronic Communications System to Procure Minor

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Bourbon County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was charged with Prohibited Use of Electronic Device as means to induce a minor to engage in sexual or other prohibited activities. This was a sting operation set up by the local police department in Bourbon County, Kentucky. Our client was arrested with about 20 other people, all of which were charged with essentially the same crime. Every case arising from this sting operation resulted in a conviction, except our case. The prosecutor agreed to dismiss the allegations against our client on the eve of trial.

Our Defense- We immersed ourselves in our client's computer information. We have a significant amount of knowledge about computers and computer forensics. We basically became more of an expert on the computer software used by the police agency than the police agency itself. We continued to aggressively push the case forward toward trial and made it clear to the prosecutor the computer forensics contained fatal shortcomings, including solid proof that our client did not commit the alleged crime. After the prosecutor verified the issues we brought up, the prosecutor dismissed the case.

Assault on a Police Officer, Unlawful Imprisonment, Resisting Arrest

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Fayette County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was a college student attending a private house party. The police arrived at the home, but no one at the party was willing to answer the door when the police knocked. The police came to the rear of the house and began looking in the windows. One of the officers eventually broke the door down and arrested our client as he was the first person the officer made contact with once inside. Our client was accused of allegedly holding another student against her will at the party and resisting arrest. Further, when the officer broke through the door he scratched his hand and charged our client with assault on a police officer.

Our Defense: The case was about to proceed to a preliminary hearing. We met with the Commonwealth to discuss possible resolution as our client had no criminal history and desired finality of the case. We pointed out that the scratch the officer received as a result of breaking in a door was not sufficient to prove assault on a police officer. We also provided the prosecutor with photographs from the incident including the broken door and areas surrounding the property such as the fence the police entered to gain access to the rear of the home. In addition, no one was being held against their will at the party. At most, the residents were attempting to prevent those who were intoxicated from driving under the influence. Basically, our client was over-charged for attending a typical college party in which the police were called. Our client agreed to enter a diversion program in which he performed a minimal amount of community service and the case was dismissed.

Receiving Stolen Property, Contempt of Court

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kenton County

Case Dismissed

Case History – Our client was accused of stealing a television and pawning it for cash. Allegedly, our client stole the television to pay for drugs and was charged with receiving stolen property. In addition, our client was charged with contempt for missing a court date due to circumstances beyond her control.

Our Defense – It was discovered the owner of the television was a drug addict. Not only did he report the television as being stolen to the police, but he also made a claim to his insurance carrier as he wanted the money for it. At the Pre-Trial Conference, we informed the Commonwealth that their case had several flaws. The Commonwealth had no way to prove who owned the pawned television as this was an old case. In addition, the pawn shop was located in another state, so we attacked the issue of jurisdiction. Finally, we explained the situation surrounding our client's contempt charge and provided the prosecutor with proof to back up our claims. The prosecutor agreed and dismissed the case entirely.

Incest, Child Sexual Abuse, Rape

Commonwealth of Kentucky/ The Cabinet (DCBS), Franklin County

Allegations Found Unsubstantiated; Client Was Not Arrested

Case History: Our client was accused by his daughter of having sexual intercourse with her. She was 11 years old at the time. The client's wife, and the mother of the child, immediately took the child to the hospital for a full exam. The Cabinet got involved and attempted to substantiate child abuse allegations against our client. Further, the Cabinet forced our client to leave the residence. The Kentucky State Police began an investigation and attempted to obtain a statement and polygraph test from our client. When our firm was retained, we stopped all contact between the police and our client.

Our Defense: We reviewed all medical evidence and consulted other medical personnel about the likelihood that those results could be from acts described by the child. Basically, there were no medical findings of any sexual activity. An exam would likely have revealed some evidence of trauma given the amount of violence the child alleged was sustained. We also brought forth a prior incident where the accuser made a similar allegation about a boy at school sexually assaulting her. However, the boy did not exist. The child created the story for attention. The Cabinet unsubstantiated the allegations, criminal charges were not filed, and our client did not get arrested.


Commonwealth of Kentucky, Johnson County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our clients were two brothers that were accused of performing sadistic sexual acts on children less than 12 years of age. The children were one client's daughters and the other client's nieces. They were both indicted on two counts of sodomy. One client was serving prison time for an unrelated incident and refused to leave prison by fighting extradition to Kentucky until we could vindicate him. Both clients adamantly denied the allegations and maintained their innocence.

Our Defense: Both clients had similar defenses. One of them had been in prison for several years in another state. The allegation against him could not have been accurate as he was in another state's penitentiary when the event supposedly occurred. The other client was also several hundred miles away in a different state due to his employment when the event allegedly occurred. We verified our client was in the other state by gathering receipts from his credit card purchases as well as work time sheets. Both indictments were dismissed.

Domestic Violence

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Campbell County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client and his live in girlfriend had a toxic relationship. They also had a young child together. After a bad argument, our client's girlfriend called the police and claimed domestic violence. Our client was arrested and removed from the home. His girlfriend then immediately filed for a protective order and custody of their child.

Our Defense: The accuser had no visible injuries despite her description of forceful violence perpetrated upon her by our client. However, our client had numerous scratch marks on his body. She also had a drug addiction issue with pills. We brought to light the timing of her actions as well as the lack of injury to her and the documented injuries to our client. We were able to convince the prosecutor that the accuser was making the domestic violence claim in order to gain an advantage in a custody dispute with our client. Our client was also engaged in counseling as this child was his first and only child and he wanted to be a good father. Once we provided proof of our client's counseling sessions, the prosecutor dismissed the charges.

Possession of Drugs and Drug Paraphernalia

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kenton County

Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was on his way home from a concert. He stopped at a fast food restaurant to eat and get some rest prior to driving home as he lived several hours away. He woke up to find police officers with canines around his car. The police alleged our client was acting suspicious by sleeping in his vehicle in the restaurant's parking lot. He was searched and charged with possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia.

Our Defense: Our client had no criminal history and was a contributing member to society. He was a college student and maintained full time employment. An agreement was made with the prosecutor to dismiss the case if our client entered a diversion program and performed minimal community service. Our client did so and the case was dismissed.

Felonious Assault and Child Abuse

State of Ohio, Miami County

Not Guilty

Case History: Our client was a young father who was accused of child abuse. Our client was accused of twisting his infant son's leg to the point of breaking it. Our client denied ever harming his child. The case went to trial.

Our Defense: Our client gave a statement to the police which on first blush seemed to implicate him. However, we decided to keep the statement in evidence. During our client's police interview, the police continually put heavy pressure on our client to be remorseful and even convinced our client to write a letter to his son to read in 20 years. Our client continually showed great emotion for his son's injury as any parent would, but he never agreed with the police that he actually harmed his son. The State attempted to show our client as a monster who twisted his son's leg to the point of breaking it. We showed our client as a distraught father who would do anything for his son. The State brought in a medical doctor to bolster their case. However, this doctor was heavily discredited through our cross examination. We showed the doctor to be testifying more on emotion than on medical facts. We used the doctor's testimony to show how there were numerous possible causes of the child's injury and the scenario posed by the State involving our client was highly unlikely. The verdict was Not Guilty on all counts.

Sexual Abuse of a Minor

Commonwealth of Kentucky/ The Cabinet (DCBS), Fayette County

No Charges Filed

Case History: Our client was accused of molesting his girlfriend's 13 year old daughter. The child made a statement alleging our client placed his hands in her pants. Both the Kentucky State Police and the Cabinet immediately got involved.

Our Defense: As soon as our client contacted us we intervened immediately on his behalf. We contacted all government agencies involved and forbid them from speaking to our client. We informed those same agencies that our office would be speaking on our client's behalf. First, we obtained all information on the allegation to see if it was possible to discredit the statement. Our office discovered the child said there was no sexual touching involved. The actual statement the child supposedly made never became clear, but our office made it clear that there was no sexual contact. Our client was vindicated from all wrong doing and no criminal charges were filed.

Assault in the First Degree and Robbery

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kenton County

No Charges Filed

Case History: Our client had a party where several of his friends attended. All those who attended the party were drinking alcohol. At some point, the accuser stumbled and fell. When he got up, he was bleeding in the stomach area. He was taken to the hospital where he informed police that our client was intoxicated and became angry resulting in our client stabbing the accuser. The accuser also stated that our client took the accuser's wallet after the stabbing.

Our Defense: Once our client was informed of the allegations, he contacted us immediately. The police were in route to speak with our client. We contacted the police and informed them not to speak with our client and that we would speak on his behalf. We informed the police that we disagreed with the allegation especially after speaking with witnesses to the incident. We discovered the accuser was heavily intoxicated. The accuser stood up from his chair, stumbled, and fell down on the cement patio landing on his beer bottle thus cutting his stomach. Our client remembered picking up glass with blood on when he cleaned up after the party and threw it in the trash. We informed the police about the bottle and showed them the broken glass. We also told the police the accuser was heavily intoxicated. The police declined to file charges against our client.


Commonwealth of Kentucky/ The Cabinet (DCBS), Rowan County

No Charges Filed

Case History: Our client married a woman who had three children from a previous relationship. One of these children was an adult female. It is alleged our client began a relationship with the adult female daughter of his wife after they separated. The adult daughter gave birth to a child. The baby of the adult daughter was allegedly the child of our client. Both the Kentucky State Police and The Cabinet got involved in the case. The police were pursuing our client for the crime of incest. Even though the daughter of his wife was a consenting adult and not biologically related to our client, Kentucky law deems sexual relations with any step-child, even an adult, to be criminally incestuous.

Our Defense: The two other children of our client's wife denied ever being sexually abused or involved with our client. There were no allegations of our client being in any way physically improper with children. We therefore eliminated The Cabinet from the investigation. The Kentucky State Police were attempting to obtain DNA samples from our client and the newborn child. We refused to provide the DNA sample absent a court order. When the Kentucky State Police were attempting to get the search warrant, we provided them with evidence that our client resided in another state. We informed the investigating officers that, even if they could show sexual relations occurred between our client and the adult step-daughter, they could never prove such acts occurred within the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The other state in which our client resided does not have the crime of criminal incest. The investigation of our client stopped and no charges were filed.

Sexual Abuse of a Minor

Commonwealth of Kentucky/ The Cabinet (DCBS), Madison County

No Charges Filed

Case History: Our client was accused of sexually abusing his granddaughter. The Cabinet and the Kentucky State Police became immediately involved. Our client was scheduled to give both a statement and a polygraph test to the Kentucky State Police the day after our office was retained as well as be interviewed by the Cabinet. Our client denied the allegations completely.

Our Defense: We immediately notified all governmental agencies of our involvement in the case. At that time we cancelled the scheduled statement, polygraph, and interview. We informed both the Cabinet and the Kentucky State Police that we would investigate the allegations before taking any action or making any agreements with them. After we investigated the case, our office determined there was not enough evidence to arrest our client. The police needed an incriminating statement from our client in order to make an arrest. We declined to have our client make any statements and asked all government agencies to cease all contact with our client. The police did not have probable cause to arrest our client and the matter was terminated criminally. Our client agreed to stay away from his granddaughter and The Cabinet had no further interactions with our client.

Sexual Abuse of a Minor

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Jessamine County

No Charges Filed

Case History: Our client was accused of sexually molesting his niece. The allegation came from the ex-wife of our client's brother. It was alleged that our client made the child view pornography and perform oral sex on one occasion five years ago. Our client denied the allegations and no one in his family believed the accusations including his brother.

Our Defense: The Kentucky State Police contacted our client to schedule an interview. Our client retained our firm before the scheduled interview. We immediately cancelled the interview and informed the Kentucky State Police that our client would only communicate through our office. Our office began an investigation into the allegations and found the child's mother, the ex-wife of our client's brother, was in a domestic dispute with our client's brother. Our client helped his brother out financially throughout the dispute. We showed the Kentucky State Police the timing of the allegations, which were over five years old. The Kentucky State Police knew they did not have enough evidence to arrest our client and they did not want to be involved in a domestic court case. The case was closed against our client and no charges were filed.


Commonwealth of Kentucky, Mercer County

No Charges Filed

Case History: Our client was an elderly gentleman in bad health. A man in his late twenties accused our client of molesting him approximately 10 years prior. The accuser alleged that he performed yard work for our client during the summer months while in high school and our client molested him during this time.

Our Defense: The accuser had known our client and his family for many years. The accuser was a drug addict who made several requests for money from our client. These requests were oral and in text message form. Our client refused to give the accuser money. The accuser began aggressively pursuing our client for monetary demands and threatened disclosure of alleged sexual abuse. Our client retained our firm to stop the threats and allegations. Our office gathered background information on the accuser including his criminal records. Our office contacted the accuser and made it clear that our client fully intended to defend himself against both the allegations and the extortion if he did not cease his conduct. The accuser stopped all harassment and communication with our client. No criminal charges were filed against our client.

Rape, Gross Sexual Imposition

State of Ohio, Butler County

Client arrested but Failure to Indict

Case History: Our client was at a friend's house when a female friend of the homeowner came over to visit. The three of them had dinner while at the home. After dinner, our client and the female began drinking alcohol. The homeowner had another engagement so our client and the female left. The female accuser said our client offered her a ride to ensure she got home safely. She alleged they both went into her apartment, but she was heavily intoxicated to the point her ability to physically resist was substantially impaired. She claimed our client came into her bedroom and forced himself upon her after she repeatedly refused. Our client was arrested and charged with rape. His friend, the homeowner, immediately contacted us to retain our services.

Our Defense: As our client was already arrested, our initial focus was to beat the case at the preliminary hearing or grand jury. Our office requested the homeowner gather the whiskey bottle our client and the accuser were drinking from. The homeowner marked how full the bottle was when the drinking began (it was nearly full). Our client and the accuser drank almost ¾ of a bottle of whiskey. The homeowner also informed us that the accuser was flirtatious with our client and it seemed they wanted to continue getting to know each other that evening. When the homeowner, our client and the accuser were leaving, a neighbor came outside and started talking with them. The neighbor did not know our client or the accuser, but the neighbor believed they were in a relationship based on their actions. The neighbor also informed us the accuser happily got into our client's car. All this information was given to the State of Ohio. Our legal defense strategy was one of consent. All information our office gathered showed consensual conduct of the accuser. The State of Ohio failed to indict our client and the matter was concluded.


State of Ohio, Warren County

Client Arrested but Dismissed at Preliminary Hearing

Case History: Our client was an exotic dancer as was her friend. Both our client and her friend went to an appointment for a private dance. There was a male escort with our client and her friend for safety purposes. The friend and the escort went into the private home while our client waited in the car. Our client was only attending as the driver and not as a dancer. After a brief period of time both the friend and the escort returned to the car and our client drove away. They were all stopped shortly thereafter by the police for allegedly robbing the homeowner. Our client was charged as an accomplice for being the "get-away-driver". At the arraignment, the judge noticed our client had a significant drug history. The judge asked our client what drugs would be in her system if she were drug tested and our client did identify a few of drugs. When she was drug tested, the drugs she identified were not present in her system, however she tested positive for a serious narcotic drug which she did not disclose. Despite the drug issue, we were able to get her released to her mother's custody on bail as long as she agreed to remain drug free. The matter was set for a preliminary hearing.

Our Defense: At the preliminary hearing, we were able to establish two essential facts which destroyed the State's case. First, even if there was a robbery, the State had no evidence to show our client knew a robbery was going to occur. There was no firearm or weapon used and our client knew her friend and the escort did not have any weapons. Second, we were able to establish the only money the client's friend had was the amount paid for the dance. Our defense was that the accuser became disgruntled when looking for more than just a dance and our client's friend refused anything further. When the accuser was rebuffed, he demanded his money back, so the dancer and male escort left the premises. The matter did not survive the grand jury and the case was dismissed.

Gross Sexual Imposition

State of Ohio/ Jobs and Family Services (Child Protective Services), Montgomery County

No Charges Filed

Case History: Our client was living with his girlfriend and his girlfriend's teenage daughter. The teenager made an allegation that she was molested by our client. Our client not only disputed the allegation but he did not take the allegation seriously. Child protective services demanded the mother bring the child to them immediately to be "forensically interviewed". Our client drove the mother and the teenager to the scheduled interview thinking this matter would be quickly terminated and he would be vindicated. He accompanied his girlfriend and the teenager to the office. Child protective services demanded he leave the premises. He complied, again thinking he would be vindicated. While waiting in his car he began surfing the internet about false allegations. He found our web site and contacted us, mainly out of curiosity as he did not take the allegations seriously. We explained the serious nature of the allegations even if completely untrue. We described for him in great detail all the things that were about to occur. He listened to what we said and told us he would contact us if he needed anything further. Over the next 48 hours his life turned upside down and everything we predicted would happen did happen. Our client called us back and retained our firm.

Our Defense: As about two days lapsed from the time he initially contacted us to when we were retained, our client was already removed from his own home. We informed him that our priority was to prevent any criminal charges from arising. If he was charged criminally, life as he knew it would cease to exist. He was scheduled to give statements to police detectives and child protective services. When we were retained, we cancelled both appointments for our client. The police searched his home and took various items which they considered evidence. The police and child protective services refused to give us or our client any details regarding the allegation. We, in turn, refused to provide them with any information as they were withholding even the basics of the allegation. The situation stagnated as no incriminating evidence was found. This stalemate was in our client's favor as they had no evidence to support the allegation. Our client was able to move back into his home and secure his possessions again. No criminal charges were filed against our client.

Unlawful Use of Electronic Device to Induce Minor

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Pendleton County

No Charges Filed/No Arrest.

Case History: Our client sent text messages and telephone calls to his minor daughter's friend. These communications were of a sexual nature. The minor's parents found the text messages and contact the Kentucky State Police. Both the Kentucky State Police and The Cabinet began an investigation to charge our client with the use of an electronic device to induce a minor into sexual activity.

Our Defense: We immediately intervened on our client's behalf and severed all communication between the government and our client. Our client had multiple cell phones and we had them forensically examined so we could determine the content of the messages. We discovered that the cell phone owned by the minor had technical issues and was unable to store amounts of data (however some text messages were still able to be retrieved). We were requested by the Kentucky State Police to turn over his cell phone. We refused this request absent a warrant. We made it clear to the Kentucky State police that our client's family had numerous cell phones and it would be difficult, if not impossible, to prove who sent any of the text messages. The combination of issues we presented the Kentucky State Police and The Cabinet dissuaded both agencies to stop the investigation.

Incest, Sex Abuse

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Martin County

No Charges Filed/No Arrest

Case History: Our client's 15 year old step-daughter accused our client of inappropriately touching her. The minor informed a friend at her school of the touching who in turn told a school official. The Kentucky State Police and The Cabinet began an investigation.

Our Defense: The child was forensically interviewed by The Cabinet. A Kentucky State Police Officer was observing the interview. The child also was given a physical exam by a medical doctor and a SANE (sexual assault nurse examiner) nurse. The results of both examinations did not confirm or deny any allegations. Both agencies requested additional time and examinations of the child. After we became involved, we refused additional contact with the minor arguing that pressing for additional information would not only produce even more inconsistent results but that the examinations themselves were mentally destructive to the child. Basically, we argued that if the agencies were unable to get enough information the first time, how could a second round of examinations possibly clarify anything when so much time had elapsed. We also disclosed to the Kentucky State Police that the child was rebellious and was being disciplined by our client for leaving the house late at night to sneak out with her boyfriend. We told both the Kentucky State Police and The Cabinet that their interference was empowering this child to make more improper accusations to divert attention from her bad behavior. The Kentucky State Police did not file criminal charges. We entered into a stipulation with The Cabinet that the child was "Dependent" and was to receive counseling.

Incest, Sex Abuse

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Scott County

No Charges Filed, No Arrest

Case History: Our client's adopted daughter (young teen) was a discipline problem. One night she ran away. When the police were notified the child was located. The child told the police she did not want to go home because she was being molested by our client. Kentucky State Police and The Cabinet began an investigation.

Our Defense: Our client retained us immediately after hearing the allegation. We met with our client and his family after hours to start our involvement that same day. We contacted both the Kentucky State Police and The Cabinet and severed the communication between our client and these government agencies. Both agencies were requesting a statement from our client. We provided them a written statement, drafted by us and signed by our client, denying any improper conduct. We obtained copies of the child's statements, one from each agency or person whom the child spoke to, and evaluated each statement. We showed the government how the statements contained contradictions with details that should not have been inconsistent. We also provided the child's behavioral history to show how the child was escaping responsibility and punishment by making the allegations. No charges were filed but a stipulation of dependency was made with The Cabinet (DCBS) that the child was in need of counseling.

Possession of Controlled Substance

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kenton County

Charges Dismissed

Case History: Our client was seen snorting a substance while a passenger in traffic. Police were called and the driver was pulled over for investigation. Our client was charged with two counts of possession of a controlled substance, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and contempt of court (for missing a prior court hearing).

Our Defense: All the drugs (except one) were located in the cup holders between the driver and passenger seats. Our client had one prescription drug on her but we produced a valid prescription for that narcotic from a friend of hers. We argued that it is legal for her to pick up a valid prescription for a third person. We also argued that the drugs in the cup holder could just as easily been the driver's drugs. The prosecution dismissed all charges except one drug charge. However, the agreement was made that if our client did not pick up any additional charges for a two year period, the final charge would be dismissed. The two years elapsed and the final charge was dismissed.

Cultivating Marijuana

State of Ohio, Ottawa County

Motion to Suppress Granted and Affirmed on Appeal

Case History: Our client was in his home when police knocked at his back door to investigate reports of a marijuana grow. The police ultimately entered our client's home alleging they saw marijuana being destroyed in the basement of the home. Previous defense counsel held a suppression hearing and the court denied the motion. Our client had surveillance/security video which the police confiscated and refused to return to our client even through proper discovery. After we were retained on the case, and after the previous motion to suppress was denied, we immediately went to the judge and demanded the video be turned over and the judge agreed. We retained an expert to open the video (as it was downloaded to a computer type of system). The video disclosed information which was contrary to the testimony the police gave at the motion to suppress hearing. The police also confiscated over $30,000.00 in cash and over $50,000.00 worth of firearms from our client's home after doing the search.

Our Defense: After our firm was retained and we found the video was not turned over, our firm began the process of securing a copy of the surveillance equipment confiscated from our client's home. This proved difficult as the equipment was technologically advanced and the State did not have the means or knowledge to copy the video contained on the equipment. The State continued to stall, but we pushed to view this evidence and the judge agreed. Ultimately, after retaining an expert we viewed the video and found severe discrepancies in the testimony of the officers and what actually happened the day of the search. Our client's Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure had been clearly violated. Our firm filed to reopen the suppression hearing based on this new evidence and our client having been denied due process and a full and fair opportunity to be heard. A reopening was granted by the trial court. Ultimately a second suppression hearing was held and we argued the conduct of the officers in conducting their search was an egregious violation of our client's fourth amendment rights and the State should not benefit from the untruthfulness and egregious conduct of these officers. The trial court granted the motion to suppress all evidence obtained during the search of our client's home. The State then appealed and the Ohio Court of Appeals for the Sixth Appellate District affirmed the decision of the trial court to suppress the evidence obtained in this illegal search. All charges against our client were dismissed and all money and property was returned to our client.

Possession of Marijuana

State of Ohio, Mason County Municipal Court

Motion to Suppress Granted, Case Dismissed

Case History: Our client was stopped by police as there was a report that her co-defendant was trespassing at an amusement park. When the police stopped our client they called in a drug dog to sniff a vehicle owned by the co-defendant in this case. Our client's purse was removed from the vehicle as she was willingly cooperating with the police in apprehending the co-defendant. The drug dog alerted to the vehicle and the police located marijuana inside the vehicle. The police then searched her purse and the police found marijuana and charged the client with possession of marijuana. The co-defendant was charged for this marijuana seized during a legal search.

Our Defense: The police may liberally use a drug sniffing dog on vehicles where there is any suspicious activity. Once a dog alerts to a vehicle, the officers may then search the entire vehicle. Our client's purse was not in the vehicle when the dog alerted to the vehicle. The State argued the police could search the purse because it was inside the vehicle just before the dog alerted to the vehicle. We argued the police may only search the vehicle and the items in the vehicle when the dog alerts to the vehicle. The court granted the motion to suppress the evidence and the case was dismissed.

Possession of Drugs

State of Ohio, Hancock County

Guilty Verdict Overturned on Appeal

Case History: Our client was the passenger in a vehicle traveling on I-75. The vehicle was stopped and searched. A large amount of prescription drugs were found in the vehicle. Both the driver and the passenger (our client) were arrested and charged with possession of drugs. Both defendants were represented by the same attorney at the trial level (not an attorney associated with our firm). Our client was offered a plea bargain with a probation sentence, but declined the offer and both defendants were found guilty by a jury at trial.

Our Defense: On appeal we argued it was ineffective assistance of counsel for our client to be jointly represented by an attorney along with the co-defendant especially at the plea bargaining stage. Our client's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was violated by this joint representation. One attorney could not effectively advise our client regarding a beneficial plea bargain which required our client to testify against the co-defendant which co-defendant also represented by the same attorney. Even though both defendants agreed to joint representation, our argument convinced the Ohio Court of Appeals for the Third Appellate District to overturn the conviction.

Sexual Battery

State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Not Guilty

Case History: Our client had consensual sexual contact with an adult woman. The State alleged this woman did not have the mental capacity to consent and that our client new of this diminished capacity. Our client and the accuser attended the same school. Our client was in the process of applying for government jobs as a firefighter but was denied employment until the case was resolved.

Our Defense: It was our defense that this woman did in fact have the mental capacity to consent and even if she did not, our client did not know of this mental defect. We hired an expert to evaluate the case and determine the ability to consent to sexual contact. However, at trial, we did not need to call our expert to testify as we turned the State's own expert into an expert on our behalf. Essentially, the State's expert was forced to concede under our cross examination that the accuser did possess the mental capacity to consent to sex. We proved the woman did have the capacity to consent sex and our client did not know of any diminished capacity. Our client was found not guilty.


State of Ohio, Harrison Mayor's Court

Not Guilty

Case History: Our client, the father of a child, was accused of assault by his child's maternal grandfather, for a dispute during an exchange of the child between parents.

Our Defense: We contended these allegations were simply a ploy to gain custody by one parent. The testimony of the accusing parent and grandparent were suspect and we argued this to the court. Further, the State was unable to prove any injuries to the alleged victim. In the end, our client was found not guilty at trial.


State of Ohio, Hamilton County

Not Guilty

Case History: Our client was stopped for crossing over a line coming into a turning lane, something we all do on a daily basis. The client admitted to having two beers with dinner. The client refused to submit to a breathalyzer test and performed all field sobriety tests administered by the officer. Our client was arrested and charged with driving under the influence.

Our Defense: We focused our defense one two issues. First the State could not prove our client was over the legal limit for blood alcohol content. Second the State could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his ability to drive was substantially impaired. Through cross examination of the arresting police officer, as well as pointing to numerous facts shown on the cruiser video, the Court could not find beyond a reasonable doubt that our client was over the legal limit or that he was substantially impaired. A not guilty verdict was rendered.

Our Legal Honors & Rewards