Results from Some of Our Winning Cases
2nd Driving While Intoxicated with .32 BAC, Dallas, TX – Motion to Suppress Won & Dismissed by Judge
Our client was only 30 years old and arrested for DWI-2nd in Dallas County. She was detained in a parking lot outside of a bar at 2:30 a.m. After failing the field sobriety tests, the police officer got a warrant for her blood. The results were .32. Four times the legal limit! There was a lot on the line for our client being so young and facing a second conviction. The case was put on hold because of COVID-19. After waiting a year for her day in court, Matt was able to argue and convince the Judge that the stop was an illegal stop. The case was then DISMISSED.
Fraud Use/Possess ID/Info of Elderly, Fort Worth – Found Not Guilty by Jury
Our client was accused of stealing her mother’s identity and opening up several credit cards in her name. She ended up being accused of 5 criminal charges. Our client’s mother is an elderly woman who the state thought was a credible witness and would be sympathetic to a jury. The client works for the IRS and has built a career in accounting that required government clearance to access certain information. Any guilty plea would have cost our client her job & retirement. While the case was pending, we went through hundreds of pages of credit card records, several witness interviews, police reports, and because of the alleged victim’s age, even had a deposition. Although there was a lot of circumstantial evidence, we did not believe there was enough to find our client guilty of these 5 allegations. We wanted to fight for our client and her career, so we went to trial. At trial, all the evidence was presented to a jury over the course of four days. After all the evidence was presented and arguments were made, the jury found her NOT GUILTY of four of the allegations and the state DISMISSED the fifth. Our client was able to keep her job, keep her retirement, and have the future she wanted before she was arrested.
Unauthorized Use of Vehicle – Reduced To Misdemeanor
Our client decided to take his employer’s car home during his lunch break and unfortunately on the way back he had a minor accident. He did not have permission from his employer to take the car so he was charged with a State Jail Felony of Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle. And on top of the felony charge, he was also hit with an ICE/Immigration hold. Our client had been in the United States since he was a child so he did not want to get deported. I immediately contacted his employer to get his position on what he wanted to happen. The employer did not want our client to get in trouble and agreed to sign an affidavit of non-prosecution. I then presented the affidavit to the DA along with mitigating circumstances and he eventually agreed to reduce it from a State Jail felony to a misdemeanor. Now, thankfully the client is in a better position to remain in the United States due to not having a felony conviction.
Resisting Arrest/Search/Transport – Dismissed
Our client and his friend were out one night drinking at a bar. As they were leaving, our client was trying to stop his friend from getting into a fight so he kept pulling him back. This caught the attention of the officers and they approached them to talk. Our client kept interjecting, which irritated the officer and he decided to arrest him for public intoxication. When being handcuffed, our client kept asking why he was being arrested and began to slightly pull away. The officers then charged him with resisting search or transport. After discussing the case with the DA and making him realize that our client was actually trying to de-escalate the situation, the DA agreed to dismiss the case.
Possession of Dangerous Drug – Dismissed
Our client was walking with her friend across the street and were stopped by an Arlington Police Officer. He came in contact with her while she was sitting in her car. The officer ordered her out of the vehicle and arrested her for the jaywalking violation. Our client asked the officer if he would retrieve her prescription medication out of her car so she could take it with her to jail. The officer searched our client’s vehicle for the prescription drugs and found a single white pill not inside a prescription bottle. He then charged our client with possession of a dangerous drug (Xanax). Our attorney informed the district attorney that there were discrepancies in the lab report results of the Xanax pill. The district attorney agreed with our attorney and dismissed the case.
Driving While Intoxicated with a .11 breath test – Found Not Guilty by Jury
Our client came in contact with Keller Police Officers at a party. The police officers watched her drive away and then later pulled her over for suspension of underage drinking. Officers quickly turned the detention into a DWI investigation. Our client failed all three field sobriety tests. During trial, the Police Officers admitted on the stand that if it wasn’t for the .11 breath test, they would have only given our client a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) ticket. Our attorney emphasized issues with the breath test machine and was able to convince the jury that the .11 breath test sample was inaccurate. On the second day of trial, the Jury found our client Not Guilty of Driving While Intoxicated.
.14 blood sample – Found Not Guilty by Jury
Our client was seen by Crowley Police Officers leaving a bar and subsequently weaving between his lane of traffic. Our client was pulled over for failing to maintain a single lane. He admitted to having 5 alcoholic beverages. Once ordered out of the vehicle, our client performed 3 roadside field sobriety tests; failing two of them and passing one. He was then arrested and charged with Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). Our client consented to having his blood drawn. His test came back as a .14 blood alcohol concentration (BAC). During cross examination of the State’s chief forensic toxicologist, our attorney was proficient in eliciting testimony that the client’s blood alcohol level was below the legal limit of .08 at the time of driving his vehicle. After a three-day trial, the Jury came back with a Not Guilty verdict!
.17 Blood Specimen and Car Accident – Found Not Guilty by Jury
Our client side-swiped another vehicle in front of a police car, then was attempting to pull over to a safe location, and the Fort Worth police officer accused her of failing to stop at an accident. Once pulled over, the police officer asked her if she had been drinking. She admitted to 5 drinks. She was asked to step out of the vehicle and performed four roadside field sobriety tests. She failed all four tests. She refused to provide a blood alcohol specimen. A warrant was issued for her blood sample. The sample came back as .17 (which is over double the legal limit of .08). Our client was nervous about going to trial because of her high BAC (blood alcohol concentration) level; however, our attorney persuaded her to fight her case. During the trial, our attorney cross-examined the blood test analyst and was able to convince the jury that the specimen was not accurate and the jury found our client Not Guilty of Driving While Intoxicated!
Speeding and Weaving through Traffic – Found Not Guilty by Jury
Our client was leaving The Gaylord Texan Resort after his date on Valentine’s day and was pulled over by Grapevine Police Department for weaving in and out of traffic at a high rate of speed in a Porsche. Grapevine police officers ran our client’s criminal background and saw his prior DWI conviction. Our client was asked if he had been drinking and he said “no.” The police officers stated that they smelled the odor of alcohol. Our client was ordered out of the vehicle and asked to perform field sobriety tests. Our client was not willing to cooperate with the officers and even tried to film them with his iPhone. This angered the police officers. Our client then decided to cooperate and partially performed a few field sobriety tests and failed both of them. He was then arrested and charged with Driving While Intoxicated-Misdemeanor Repetition (DWI 2nd). Our client was adamant he was innocent and our attorney went to trial to fight for him! After a two-day trial in Tarrant County, Texas, our attorney was able to convince the jury that weaving and speeding is not a sign of intoxication. The Jury found him Not Guilty of Driving While Intoxicated-Misdemeanor Repetition!
.14 Breath Test/Alcohol Concentration – Found Not Guilty by Jury
Fort Worth police department pulled our client over for driving the wrong way down a one-way street. The officers asked her if she had been drinking and our client admitted to a few beers and a few shots. This initiated the investigation of Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). Our client failed all 3 field sobriety tests and was then arrested and charged with Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). At the police station, our client cooperated and agreed to take a breathalyzer test. She blew a .146 and .147 (which is almost double the legal limit). During a two-day trial in Tarrant County, Texas, our attorney argued that the results of the breath test were unreliable and that the roadside tests were easy to fail. The Jury found our client Not Guilty of Driving While Intoxicated!
Driving While Intoxicated with Car Accident, Grapevine TX – Found Not Guilty by Jury
Our client flipped his vehicle on the highway coming from Grapevine, Texas. Officers arrived at the scene and required our client to perform field sobriety tests in front of his flipped over vehicle to make sure the accident was visible to any potential jurors in the dashcam video. Our client admitted to the Grapevine police department that he had consumed alcohol before driving. We went through jury selection three different times to ensure we had the best six jurors for our client’s case. During trial we were able to point out flaws in the police officer’s investigation and holes in the prosecution’s case. After a brief deliberation, the jury came back with a not guilty verdict!
Unlawful Carry Weapon By Gang Member, Fort Worth – Dismissed
Our client was in Fort Worth for a motorcycle rally and was wearing the cut of a particular gang that is considered an organized criminal organization. He was pulled over for failing to signal at a stop sign and was later arrested for unlawful carry of weapon (UCW). The only reason the carrying of the gun was considered unlawful was because of the alleged participation in a criminal street gang. We convinced the DA that merely wearing a cut belonging to a potential criminal street gang was not enough to document our client as a gang member without any other proof. The DA then dismissed our client’s case without any conditions and our client did not have to pay fines or court costs.
Felony Drug Case, Tarrant County – Reduced To Misdemeanor
Our client was arrested for felony possession of controlled substance (cocaine) under 1 gram and unlawful carry of weapon (UCW) in Tarrant County, TX. After discussing the holes in the DA’s case involving a potential illegal search of our client; they agreed to reduce the felony charge down to a misdemeanor and dismissed the gun charge.
Assault, Fort Worth – Case Dismissed
Our client was arrested for assault bodily injury to a family member. She was accused of punching her boyfriend. After only two Fort Worth, TX court appearances, we convinced the DA to dismiss her case without her having to do any classes, community service, probation, or pay any fines or court costs.
Possession of Dangerous Drug, Parker County – Dismissed
Our client has a heart condition that requires him to take multiple prescription drugs. He does not usually keep the pills in the prescription bottle with the label on it. He was parked on the side of the road messing with his cell phone. Officers pulled up behind him to do a motorist assist in Parker County, Texas. Upon approaching the vehicle, the officer saw empty beer bottles in the rear seat passenger floorboard and asked our client if he’d been drinking. He said “no”. They ordered him to step out of the car and searched his vehicle. Officer found the pills in a white pill bottle unmarked and our client was arrested for possession of a dangerous drug. Even though the law states that even if a person has a prescription for a drug, said drug must be in a labeled bottle with the name of drug and name of the person prescribed to, we were able to convince the DA to dismiss the charge.
Possession 4-200g Cocaine with Intent to Deliver
Our client had a prior felony conviction and was looking at a minimum of 15 years in prison if convicted of possession with intent to deliver cocaine.
Police officers had a tip that he was in possession of cocaine and knocked on his door. They claimed that the client allowed them to come in where they then saw cocaine in plain view and arrested him for possession with intent to deliver. At trial we showed that our client had told the cops through his window that he did not want to talk to them, but they would not leave. Then, when our client opened the door to tell the officers he did not want to talk, they pushed their way in. We also found police records that another cop had heard someone say through the window “no dog, we don’t want any.” This was also confirmed by a friend of our client.
At trial, we got the judge to instruct the jury that if they believed that our client had not agreed to let the cops come into his home, that the entry by the cops was an illegal entry without a warrant and in violation of the fourth amendment. The judge then said that the jury should ignore the evidence found as the result of illegal police activity and find our client not guilty. If the police officers had not entered the house, they could not have charged our client with possession. The jury agreed that the cops did not have permission to enter our client’s home and found him not guilty of possession with intent to deliver cocaine. The cocaine actually belonged to our client’s girlfriend who had a drug problem.
Tried for Intoxication Manslaughter
Our client was in court accepting probation for possessing a controlled substance. After appearing before the judge and meeting with a probation officer, she drove home. On the way she fell asleep and drifted onto the shoulder of the highway, running over a man who had parked on the shoulder with car trouble, killing him instantly. Our client was arrested on the scene and taken to a hospital for a blood test which showed she had valium in her blood.
The prosecutor claimed that she was intoxicated on valium and tried her for intoxication manslaughter. We recused the judge she had seen earlier that day and had him as a witness in the case. We examined the judge about the fact that he cannot take a plea from an intoxicated person and that he has to examine the people who appear before him to make sure they are not intoxicated when they enter a plea. We argued that the judge did just that – examined our client for intoxication – when he accepted our client’s plea earlier that day and placed her on probation. We also had our client’s attorney testify that he would not have allowed her to plead guilty to the drug charge if she had been intoxicated. Furthermore, we had an expert who testified that the level of valium in our client’s blood was consistent with a therapeutic dose and did not mean she was intoxicated. The jury found our client not guilty of intoxication manslaughter.
Not Guilty by Jury After Blowing .14 with Breathalyzer Test
Our client was stopped for a traffic violation and admitted to having a few drinks earlier. The client did okay on the field sobriety tests, but was arrested and submitted to a breathalyzer test – the result was .14. We were able to show the jury how unreliable the breathalyzer is and how the particular breathalyzer machine used on our client had some problems. The jury found our client not guilty.
Jury Acquittal for Capital Murder Charge
It was Christmas time and our client was going to walk to a holiday party. He stopped at his neighborhood convenience store to buy a scratch-off ticket – and was a winner! Just then a gang member walked in and pointed a gun at the store owner and demanded the cash. The gang member then pointed the gun at our client and told the client to grab the cigar box of money. The gunman shot the owner dead, and the gunman told our client to come with him. They drove to the gunman’s relative’s home. The gunman counted the money and gave a small amount to our client and told him not to say anything or “you know what will happen”.
Our client left and went to the Christmas party. After the gunman was arrested, the gunman confessed and said that our client had knowingly helped him commit the robbery and murder. The client was arrested and told the exact truth about what happened, but was indicted and tried for capital murder charges anyway.
At trial we showed that the client was a friend of the store owner and was working two jobs at the time and had plenty of money to live on. He was also timely paying his rent. There was no reason for him to demand cash from the store owner and murder him. We also found in the police evidence the winning scratch-off ticket that our client said he had bought and was trying to cash in when the gunman walked in the store and killed the owner.
We were able to show on cross-examination that the gunman who testified against our client had killed people in the past, was generally a terrible excuse of a person and that he traded his testimony against our client for a life sentence, sparing him the death penalty. The jury found our client not guilty of committing capital murder.
Not Guilty by Jury: Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) Charge
Our client worked in air conditioning service and repair. He was stopped for a traffic violation and admitted to having a couple of drinks earlier. He did terribly on the DWI sobriety tests and looked to the police and prosecutors to be very intoxicated. He was arrested and charged for DWI.
At trial, we were able to show that the client had some injuries and a bad back, was overweight and that the field sobriety tests were not fair for him since there was no way he could look normal on those tests. The jury quickly found our client not guilty of the DWI charge.
Not Guilty for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) Charge with .20 blood test
Our client was stopped as he pulled into a taco restaurant drive through late in the evening. After admitting that he had a few beers earlier, the police officer had our client do the DWI field sobriety tests. Even though our client did well on those tests, but not perfect, the officer arrested and charged our client for DWI. Our client submitted to a blood test which came back as .20 alcohol.
At trial, we showed the many possible mistakes that can be made in blood testing for DWI. We emphasized to the jury that our client appeared normal – and that there was no way he could be .20 and appear so normal. We also found on the video about 45 minutes after the client was arrested that the arresting cop was making fun of our client, who was Hispanic, for going to buy tacos. The officer, in a mocking and exaggerated Spanish accent, could be heard on the recording saying “…tacos, people gotta get their tacos…”. The jury only took about ten minutes to find our client not guilty of the DWI charge.
Acquitted: Drug Delivery Charge of Over 100 Pounds of Marijuana
The client had delivered over 100 pounds of marijuana to an undercover officer and had prior drug arrests and probations and was looking at a possible long prison sentence for delivering drugs – potentially a life sentence. We had demanded, prior to the trial, disclosure of any confidential informants or snitches used by the police and any deals, promises of leniency or grants of immunity given to such persons. The prosecutors represented to the court that no CI’s nor snitches had been used by the police.
At the trial for the client’s marijuana delivery charge, when it became apparent that the undercover officer had indeed used a confidential informant, we immediately objected to any evidence that was the result of information obtained through the use of the CI, for the failure of the prosecution to abide by the court’s order to disclose such information of the use of a CI or deals given a CI for their snitching. The court sustained our objection. When the state did not have sufficient information about the marijuana delivery independent of that gained through the informant, the court granted our motion for an instructed verdict of not guilty and our client was acquitted and walked out of the courtroom with us.
Preparation and proper pretrial motions by experienced Fort Worth drug manufacturing and delivery lawyers win cases.