Case Results

Fraud complaint letter – Ponzi Investment Fraud

In this case study, we examine a significant Ponzi style fraud targeting a D.C. area resident who entrusted large sums of money to an individual promising extraordinary investment returns. The client ultimately filed a fraud complaint letter after discovering the scheme and realizing the perpetrator had no intention or ability to return the borrowed funds.

Arrest for Assault Inflight Dispute Deferred Sentence

In Washington D.C., criminal allegations arising from altercations on commercial aircraft are treated with particular seriousness because they raise concerns about passenger safety and potential disruption of aircraft operations. Even minor physical contact can quickly escalate into an accusation of assault under D.C. Code § 22-404, exposing the accused to arrest for assault and potential long term professional consequences. This case study examines how defense counsel navigated a complex inflight conflict, reframed the factual narrative, and secured a deferred sentencing outcome that avoided permanent criminal penalties.The matter demonstrates how early intervention, structured factual development, and strong mitigation can redirect an “arrest for assault” case toward a non incarcerative result, particularly where the conduct occurred under defensive or reflexive circumstances rather than malicious intent.

Withdrawal of Criminal Complaint Washington DC Dual Assault

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.

Penalties for Assault Dangerous Object Suspended Sentence

In Washington D.C., criminal charges involving the use of a dangerous weapon fall under the District’s assault statutes, which distinguish between simple assault and more serious felony level offenses such as assault with a dangerous weapon (ADW). Because ADW carries significant penalties for assault including potential imprisonment, probation restrictions, and collateral consequences for non U.S. citizens foreign nationals accused of violent conduct often face heightened risks during investigation and sentencing. This case explains how a foreign client charged with ADW in Washington D.C. avoided incarceration and ultimately secured a suspended sentence through targeted mitigation, early restitution, and a structured defense strategy. While the circumstances originated from an emotional dispute, the legal framework governing penalties for assault in the District required careful evaluation of the defendant’s intent, the nature of the weapon involved, and the proportionality of the force used.