Dismissal of Charges

The best time to secure a dismissal of charges is before they are even filed. We intervene during the investigation phase.

We present exculpatory evidence to the prosecutor before the grand jury convenes. We argue that the police report is one-sided and that the credibility of the accuser is suspect. By presenting a packet of defense evidence early we give the prosecutor a reason to decline the case. If the case proceeds to a grand jury we may advise the client to testify if we believe their narrative can convince the jurors to return a no bill. A refusal to indict by the grand jury acts as a dismissal of the potential case. We aim to kill the case in the cradle before it becomes a public record.

It is critical to understand the distinction between dismissal and acquittal. An acquittal comes after a trial where a jury finds the defendant not guilty. A dismissal stops the trial from happening.

We prefer dismissal because it avoids the uncertainty of a jury verdict. We file motions to dismiss based on the sufficiency of the pleading. We argue that even if every fact in the police report is true the conduct described does not constitute a crime under the statute. This is a legal argument addressed to the judge. By attacking the legal theory of the prosecution we can often bypass the factual disputes entirely. We force the judge to rule on the law rather than asking the jury to rule on the facts.

An illegal traffic stop or a warrantless home entry is a constitutional violation. We file motions to suppress evidence seized during these encounters.

If the police stopped our client without reasonable suspicion or searched their vehicle without probable cause the drugs or weapons found are fruit of the poisonous tree. We litigate these issues in suppression hearings. We cross-examine the officers on the stand. We use their body camera footage to contradict their testimony. If the judge grants our motion and suppresses the physical evidence the prosecutor typically admits defeat. Without the drugs or the gun they cannot prove possession. This leads directly to a dismissal of charges.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees a speedy trial. If the government delays the prosecution for years without justification they violate this right.

We track the timeline of the case. We analyze the Barker factors which include the length of the delay and the reason for the delay and the prejudice to the defendant. If witnesses have died or memories have faded due to government negligence we argue that a fair trial is no longer possible. We also litigate due process violations involving the destruction of evidence. If the police lost the video footage that would have proven innocence we move to dismiss the case as a sanction for their spoliation of evidence. We argue that the government cannot prosecute a case where they have destroyed the ability of the defendant to defend themselves.

Many cases rely on the testimony of a single eyewitness. Eyewitness identification is notoriously unreliable. We challenge the identification procedures used by the police.

If the police used a suggestive photo lineup where our client was the only person who matched the description we move to suppress the identification. We also investigate the background of the witnesses. If the accuser has a history of fraud or perjury we present this to the prosecutor. We argue that a case resting on the word of a known liar cannot result in a conviction. By destroying the credibility of the key witness we remove the pillar supporting the charges. We force the prosecutor to acknowledge that they cannot win at trial.

After the preliminary hearing or the presentation of the government case at trial we move for a judgment of acquittal or dismissal. We argue that the government has failed to meet its burden.

In a constructive possession case for example the government must prove the defendant knew the contraband was there. If the drugs were found in a shared car and there is no fingerprint evidence linking our client to them we argue the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law. We cite appellate caselaw that prohibits convictions based on mere proximity. We force the judge to rule that no reasonable jury could convict based on the evidence presented. This results in an immediate dismissal of charges.

The Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland requires prosecutors to turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defense. This includes evidence that impeaches the credibility of government witnesses.

If we discover that the prosecutor hid a witness statement that exonerated our client or failed to disclose that a police officer was under investigation for corruption we file a motion to dismiss for a Brady violation. We argue that the withholding of evidence denied our client due process. In severe cases courts will dismiss the charges with prejudice to punish the government for its misconduct. We ensure that the prosecutor pays a price for hiding the truth.

An indictment must be legally perfect. It must allege all the elements of the crime and it must be filed in the correct jurisdiction.

We scrutinize the language of the charging document. If the indictment fails to specify the date of the offense or omits a necessary element like intent it is defective. We file a demurrer or a motion to quash. We also challenge jurisdiction. If the alleged crime happened in a different county or state the local court lacks the power to hear the case. We argue for dismissal based on lack of venue. These technical challenges often force the government to restart the process which can lead to missed deadlines and an ultimate dismissal of charges.

Pre-trial diversion (PTD) is common for drug offenses and minor theft crimes. The conditions typically involve community service or anger management classes or drug testing.

We advise clients on the specific requirements. We ensure they understand that this is a contract. If they complete the terms the dismissal of charges is automatic. We negotiate the terms to make them realistic for the client. We fight to minimize the costs and the duration of the supervision. We view diversion not as a punishment but as a strategic tool to secure the dismissal. We ensure that the final order clearly states the case is nolle prosequi or dismissed.

In misdemeanor cases involving property damage or simple assault many states allow for a civil compromise. This is a procedure where the judge dismisses the criminal case if the victim acknowledges they have been fully compensated for their loss.

We negotiate directly with the victim. We arrange for the payment of restitution to cover medical bills or property repairs. We draft the declaration of satisfaction for the victim to sign. We present this to the judge and move for dismissal under the civil compromise statute. We argue that the criminal justice system should not be used as a debt collection agency. Once the victim is made whole the public interest in prosecution is satisfied. This results in a full dismissal of charges.