dismissing a speeding ticket
As criminal defense attorneys, we are trained to analyze the criminal laws and to apply them to the facts of our cases. When we fight for our clients in court, we tend to keep with us these rigid notions of what the criminal law states, what the criminal law means, and how it should be applied to our clients’ cases. Sometimes, however, this rigid framework, which has been instilled in us since law school, does criminal defense lawyers more harm than good. Often, we obtain the best results for our clients when we think outside the box and forget about what the penal law says according to a strict interpretation.
I recently handled an old bench warrant case out of Inglewood Court. The case had been in bench warrant status for seven years for a straight possession of cocaine charge. My client was a smart, accomplished professional who constantly traveled for work and was rarely in one state long enough to complete any type of drug treatment program. Seven years ago he had been sentenced to complete a Deferred Entry of Judgment Program (DEJ) and had failed to do so because his job required him to travel every few weeks. His criminal lawyer at the time was aware of his job restrictions but had discovered that he was eligible for DEJ, under the statute, and advised him to accept a DEJ deal despite his obvious job conflict.
Now, when reflecting on my client’s case, and deciding how best to help him, if I had simply looked at what the options were under the California Penal Code/Health and Safety Code, I would have either: (1) asked the court to reinstate the client in the DEJ program; or (2) asked the court to place the client on formal probation with drug conditions and possible community service or jail time. Of course, both of these options would have set the client up for failure because he does not stay in one state long enough to complete DEJ or to be supervised on formal probation.
Instead, I decided to think outside the box. I requested a chambers conference with the Judge and showed the Judge my client’s employment references which demonstrated seven years of dedicated and reliable employment, and no criminal history other than this old case. I proposed a unique and creative solution. I suggested that my client be allowed to complete 20 narcotics anonymous classes in lieu of a DEJ program, because NA classes are available in every state in the United States and Worldwide. Not only did the Judge agree to the informal type of drug program, but he agreed to dismiss the case completely after 18 months if my client had no arrests and had completed the classes.
My client is now able to keep his job, to clean the skeletons out of his closet, and to move on with his life without suffering from a permanent criminal record. Sometimes, all it takes is a little creative thinking to help our clients obtain the most outstanding results.
Karen Goldstein passionately fights for her client’s rights which is best exemplified by her excellent track record in the courtroom. She handles each of her cases with persistence, passion, and principles. She is an aggressive advocate and believes in meticulous case preparation in order to provide the best possible defense for her clients. Ms. Goldstein obtained her Juris Doctorate from Georgetown University Law Center where she graduated cum laude in 2003. She received her Bachelor of Arts from Georgetown University where she graduated magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa.
If you need help with a criminal matter, please visit her website at http://www.whitegoldlaw.com
*Note: Views expressed in this article are opinions and do no constitute legal advice or a client-attorney relationship.
Got Pulled Over? Tips to get judge to dismiss my Traffic Ticket
