Skip to main content
contact us

Copyright SJKP LLP Law Firm all rights reserved

Case Results

Based on our recently accumulated litigation database, we provide customized solutions based on a thoroughly analyzed litigation database.

Withdrawal of Criminal Complaint in Washington D.C. | Defense Support in a Mutual Assault Dispute



Mutual assault allegations in Washington D.C. often require a coordinated defensive strategy built upon a detailed understanding of the District’s criminal statutes, evidentiary requirements, and prosecutorial discretion. 

 

In this case study, a client sought legal assistance after being charged with assault despite claiming to be a victim of the same incident. 

 

The situation escalated from a personal dispute, ultimately resulting in both parties filing complaints against each other. 

 

Because the District of Columbia permits complainants to pursue counter-allegations through separate charging paths, a structured legal approach was required to protect the client’s interests. 

 

The defense team focused on documenting self defense elements, addressing property damage committed by the opposing party, and strategically negotiating a withdrawal of criminal complaint that ultimately resolved the matter without financial settlement.

 


This case illustrates how a disciplined strategy rooted in D.C. criminal law, including D.C. Code § 22-404 (Assault), § 22-303 (Destruction of Property), and § 22-407 (Threats), can secure favorable closure through mutual complaint withdrawal.

contents


1. Withdrawal of Criminal Complaint in Washington D.C. | Client Background and Initial Exposure


Withdrawal of Criminal Complaint in Washington D.C.

 

 

The client sought counsel after being charged with assault stemming from a conflict initiated by the opposing party.


Although the client acted defensively, the initial complaint placed him at risk of prosecution under D.C. Code § 22-404.



Nature of the Altercation and Client’s Concerns


The dispute began when the opposing party confronted the client after discovering a personal relationship issue. 

 

According to the client, the opposing party damaged his phone, yelled aggressively, and initiated physical force, conduct that could constitute destruction of property and assault under District law. 

 

In response, the client used proportional force in an attempt to defend himself. Despite being a victim of the initial aggression, the client was surprised to face a formal complaint and therefore sought legal representation promptly. 

 

The defense team recognized that documenting self-defense principles and countervailing evidence would be essential.

 

Furthermore, the client wished to avoid escalation and expressed interest in exploring the possibility of a future withdrawal of criminal complaint.



2. Withdrawal of Criminal Complaint in Washington D.C. | Defense Strategy to Counter Allegations


To protect the client, the defense team conducted a structured assessment of all legal issues relevant under D.C. criminal statutes.


The strategy focused on demonstrating the opposing party’s role as the primary aggressor.



Filing Counter Claims and Documenting Misconduct


The defense team prepared and submitted a counter complaint detailing the opposing party’s actions, including:

 

• Physical aggression amounting to assault under D.C. Code § 22-404

• Destruction of the client’s mobile phone under D.C. Code § 22-303

• Verbally aggressive conduct consistent with threatening or intimidating behavior under D.C. Code § 22-407

 

In addition, the defense team issued a formal cease and desist notification addressing harmful rumors and reputational attacks initiated by the opposing party after the altercation. 

 

These steps clarified the evidentiary imbalance between the parties and strengthened the client's position in negotiations.



Responding to Settlement Demands


At one stage, the opposing party demanded a substantial settlement in exchange for a simultaneous withdrawal of criminal complaint. 

 

The defense team rejected this demand because the evidence showed the opposing party bore greater criminal liability. 

 

By emphasizing statutory exposure and evidentiary weaknesses, the defense team placed strategic pressure on the opposing party to reconsider.



3. Withdrawal of Criminal Complaint in Washington D.C. | Negotiating a Mutual Resolution


Following the defense team's filings and targeted communications, the opposing party reconsidered their approach.


A non-financial, mutual withdrawal of complaints became a feasible resolution.



Achieving Mutual Withdrawal Without Settlement


Ultimately, the opposing party proposed a complete withdrawal of criminal complaint from both sides, with no exchange of money or additional conditions. 

 

The client agreed after determining that this outcome aligned with his goals of avoiding prosecution and ending the dispute. 

 

The parties independently withdrew their respective complaints, resulting in closure of both matters. 

 

This outcome demonstrates how a structured criminal defense strategy and factual clarity can lead to a mutually acceptable resolution even in emotionally charged disputes.



4. Withdrawal of Criminal Complaint in Washington D.C. | Practical Takeaways for Similar Cases


This case highlights that even when both sides file assault allegations, a well planned approach can lead to a non financial resolution.


Defendants facing mutual assault investigations in Washington D.C. benefit from early legal intervention.



Importance of Early Counsel and Evidence Control


Frequently, parties involved in personal disputes underestimate the risks associated with assault complaints. 

 

Once a complaint is filed, the matter becomes part of the District’s criminal system and may proceed independently of a person’s intentions. 

 

Quick engagement with counsel is essential to preserve evidence, challenge inaccurate statements, evaluate self defense claims, and seek outcomes such as mutual withdrawal of criminal complaint.


With proper representation, clients can avoid unnecessary penalties, leverage procedural rights, and protect their credibility throughout the investigative process.


08 Dec, 2025


The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading or relying on the contents of this article does not create an attorney-client relationship with our firm. For advice regarding your specific situation, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
Certain informational content on this website may utilize technology-assisted drafting tools and is subject to attorney review.

Book a Consultation
Online
Phone
CLICK TO START YOUR CONSULTATION
Online
Phone