Success Stories
On June 6, 2020, a fight broke out between the defendant, F.H., and the victim, D.H., while inside the kitchen of their shared residence in Jersey City. During the fight, F.H. was alleged to have plunged a 6 inch long knife into the neck of F.H. which severed his carotid artery and jugular vein and caused acute blood loss and anoxic brain injury. Paramedics and police responded to the scene and found the victim unconscious but were able to revive him. Inside the residence, police found the kitchen covered in blood and recovered the blood soaked knife. As part of their investigation, detectives interviewed the other residents who overheard and witnessed part of the fight. Investigators were also able to collect footage which showed the victim bleeding from the neck and losing consciousness as well as the defendant, F.H., covered in blood fleeing from the house.
Police were unable to find F.H. since he had fled before their arrival. Based on their findings, they filed a warrant for F.H.’s arrest on 2nd degree aggravated assault. The charges carried a mandatory period of 5-10 years in state prison with 85% parole disqualifier. F.H. was later picked up on the warrant out-of-state and extradited back to New Jersey to stand trial.
At the time of trial, William A. Proetta, Esq. argued to the jury that F.H. was acting with self-defense when he stabbed D.H. in the neck and had only fled the scene prior police arrival because he was scared of possible retaliation by D.H. and for being blamed by the police for something he didn’t do. Ultimately, the jury agreed with Mr. Proetta’s arguments and, after a short deliberation, the jury found F.H. not guilty of all charges.
On June 12, 2024, Union City Police Officers received calls of a shooting in the area of Kennedy Boulevard. Upon responding, officers found the victim on the ground with a gun shot wound to his upper leg. Police began canvassing the area and were able to recover numerous videos that strung together the events before, during and after the shooting. The cops investigation to our client, E.A., and his two codefendants being charged with Attempted Murder, Conspiracy to Commit Murder and Unlawful Possession of a Handgun. In summary, E.A., and his two codefendants were alleged to have gotten in an argument with the victim at the local basketball court which then turned physical. After the physical alteration, E.A. and the codefendants were alleged to have gone home to retrieve a handgun and then track down the victim. E.A. was further alleged to have found the victim and directed a codefendant to shoot him. To make matters worse, the second codefendant, turned State’s witness and cooperated against our client E.A. and his brother. After a lengthy courtroom battle, William A. Proetta, Esq. was able to convince the State to dismiss the Attempted Murder charges against our client E.A. In the end, E.A. ultimately pled guilty to a third degree conspiracy to commit aggravated assault and received a time served sentence with probation.
State v. E.A.
On August 6, 2022, Edison Police responded to a multi-car crash on Route 1 North and South in the vicinity of Town Square. Upon arrival, officers found a seven (7) vehicle crash, which resulted in the death of C.Y. and serious bodily injury to four (4) other people. Witnesses indicated that the defendant, G.P., was operating his vehicle aggressively, at a high rate of speed, weaving through lanes, ultimately causing the crash. Police were able to secure video surveillance from a nearby business that showed the crash take place. Upon further investigation, the police came to the conclusion that G.P. was operating his vehicle in a reckless manner, at a high rate of speed and utilized the acceleration/deceleration turn lane to attempt to pass other vehicles. This reckless driving led to G.P. striking the rear of vehicle 2. After striking vehicle 2, G.P. then struck vehicle 3. The strike to vehicle 3 sent it directed toward oncoming traffic in the northbound lanes, ultimately leading to more collisions and the death of C.Y. Based on these findings, G.P. was charged with Vehicular Homicide 2C:11-5A and faced a mandatory period of incarceration for 5 – 10 years, of which 85% of the sentence would have to be served before parole.
There was extensive litigation for over a year involving experts and legal issues pertaining to the ultimate question of causation and liability. In the end, William A. Proetta, Esq. was able to convince the State to amend the charges to a third degree to avoid a mandatory state prison sentence. Then at the time of sentencing, Mr. Proetta was able to successfully convince the Judge to give G.P. a period of non-custodial probation.
State v. G.P.
I was recently retained by a young professional who had been charged with a third degree aggravated assault and was also facing a final restraining order after having a bad night with his wife. Like many domestic violence incidents – my client took the position that the allegations had been blown way out of proportion by his wife and that the police had taken her side.
I explained to him that defending these cases would be a marathon and not a race. First, we had to appear in the Superior Court on the restraining order to determine whether a final restraining order was necessary or whether the judge would dismiss the temporary restraining order that had been placed into effect the night of the alleged incident. The plaintiff, my client’s wife, had hired an attorney to try an make sure she could obtain a final restraining order against him. After spending some time speaking back and forth with her attorney and highlighting their weaknesses of the case, the plaintiff and her attorney agreed to dismiss the restraining order against my client in lieu of a consent agreement between both of them. This was a huge win for my client because he was able to avoid admittance into the Domestic Violence Registry and a forfeiture of gun ownership.
However, we still had the toughest part of the case in front of us – the criminal 3rd degree aggravated assault. If convicted, he would most likely lose his corporate job and he could clearly be incarcerated for up to 5 years in state prison, especially since this wasn’t the first time he had been arrested for an assault related crime. In order to get out my client out of this mess we had to challenge the state’s case against him. The reason the charge had been upgraded to an aggravated assault in the first place instead of a less serious simple assault was because his wife had alleged she suffered partial paralysis as a result of being hit in the face. The victim’s credibility was severely called into question when it came to light that her paralysis was a pre-existing condition and had not been caused by my client. Based on this and the victim’s unwillingness to testify in regards to such, I was able to successfully convince the County Prosecutor to dismiss the charges outright against my client.
State v. G.A.
Our theft defense attorneys recently represented a client who had been arrested for committing a substantial theft against port authority and E-ZPass in excess of over $50,000. This extraordinary amount was accumulated over 5 years of never or very rarely paying tolls as our client commuted daily to and from New York City. Our client was pulled over by a police officer as he drove through the toll plaza because he recognized his car and license plate from earlier reports of unpaid tolls. Based on the allegations, he was charged with theft of services in New Jersey.
Anytime you are dealing with a large theft alleging tens of thousands of dollars, the stakes become very steep and the penalties can be extremely serious. However, in this case our client had actually allegedly stolen from the State of New Jersey by depriving them of thousands in tolls owed. This made the situation even more serious because prosecutors typically take a harder stance when the crime is against the government. To make matters more complicated, our client was a professional and was adamant that he could not get convicted of a felony or be sentenced to incarceration because he would lose his job. So we applied our client for Pre-Trial Intervention “PTI” and began working with the prosecutor during the review process to work out the particulars and challenge the actual amount of theft that they had alleged. In the end our client was able to get admitted into PTI without making any admission of wrong doing. Once the 12 month period of PTI is successfully completed the charges will be dismissed in their entirety. If you would like to learn more about how our Jersey City Theft Lawyers can help you, such as the example above, then contact our office today for a free consultation.
State v. T.D. decided on May 23, 2017
picture compliments of nj.com
Our criminal defense attorneys recently defended a juvenile client who had been charged and arrested for 1st degree Robbery. The State alleged the following facts; first that our client along with three other accomplices, including his brother, had confronted the victim in a park while walking home. Then the group of males pushed the victim to the ground and began assaulting him by punching him several times. Then one of the assailants pulled a knife and demanded the victim’s cell phone. The State further alleged, that before it could go any farther, bystanders came to the rescue of the victim and the four assailants fled on foot. The victim was escorted to police headquarters where he was able to identity two of the individuals involved and give descriptions of the other two. Based on the victim’s first hand identification, our client and his brother were both arrested and charged with 1st degree Robbery, 3rd degree Possession of a Weapon for Unlawful Purposes, and 4th Unlawful Possession of a Weapon.
The case originally started with custodial (incarceration) offers on the table. But we maintained our client’s “not guilty” plea and began attacking weaknesses in the State’s case against our client. Although the State had a firsthand identification by the victim witness, there was no knife ever found, none of the victim’s property was taken and our client did not make an incriminating statement. Using this information, we prepped the case for trial. On the last status conference before the trial, the State conceded to the deficiencies in their proofs and it was ultimately decided that our client would receive an adjourned disposition and plead guilty to a disorderly persons offense of Simple Assault and all other charges to be dismissed. The adjourned disposition meant that upon a successful completion of probation, the guilty plea would also be dismissed in its entirety, leaving our client with no criminal or juvenile record.
State v. V.C.
2nd Eluding & Aggravated Assault Receives Conditional Dismissal
Our criminal defense attorneys recently represented a young college student athlete who had been charged with a second degree aggravated assault on a police officer under 2C:12-1b(5)(a) and second degree eluding under 2C:29-2b each carrying a presumption of state prison of 5 – 10 years. Our client was on a scholarship to play sports for the college and had never been in trouble before but at the time we got involved in his case, his life was literally hanging in the balance depending on if he got convicted of these charges or not. We first heard about the circumstances of his case after getting a call from his frantic mother who had sent her son up to New Jersey to attend college and was beside herself with what had happened to her son.
The Facts We Were Working With
The circumstances of the case were that on the day in question, our client had been waiting in traffic to enter onto the highway. Police were directing traffic on a very congested roadway that was not moving very fast. After some time our client saw an opportunity to enter onto the ramp to the highway even the police were still not letting anyone go, so he decided to enter onto the highway without their direction. He drove by the one individual directing traffic and then a uniformed police officer stepped out in front of his car to try and stop him and our client swerved and the police officer was alleged hit by his vehicle. Our client continued driving onto the ramp and on to the highway until eventually becoming stuck in traffic again and being pulled over by police.
How We Pulled It Off
Based on the alleged facts of the case it seemed that it was an honest mistake that had been blown way out of proportion and that our client had not even realized the officer was struck by the side mirror of the car. Knowing these facts and what laid in the balance for our client and his future, our criminal attorneys began defend and attack the state’s case against him. Initially, the charges were too serious on their face for the prosecutor’s office to consider a remand so the case was sent on the path to indictment. From there we began working with the prosecutor’s towards what we considered a just and equitable resolution for our client – something not involving a criminal conviction. Eventually we were able to get the county prosecutor’s office to agree to downgrade the second degree charge of eluding to a disorderly persons offense of disorderly conduct and dismiss the aggravated assault on the police officer. From there we were able to make an application and motion to court to have our client entered into the conditional dismissal program for a period of 12 months, at which time the case against him would be dismissed in its entirety up successful completion.
State v. K.C. decided July 28, 2017
Our Hudson County criminal attorneys defended a client was charged with second degree Aggravated Assault, third degree Possession of a Weapon for Unlawful Purposes, and fourth degree Unlawful Possession of a Weapon. In particular, the second degree crime was punishable by 5 – 10 years in state prison with a presumption of incarceration if found guilty. Moreover, the crime would fall under NERA (No Early Release Act) which means that a defendant would have to serve 85% of the time before being eligible for parole.
Our client was a professional and could not afford to receive a criminal record and obviously not get sentenced to incarceration. So we first appeared in Hudson County Superior Court and were able to convince the County Prosecutor’s Office to downgrade the charge to disorderly persons offense of Simple Assault and send it back down to Jersey City Municipal Court. From there we appeared multiple times with our client and presented various defenses to the prosecutor and Court in furtherance of a dismissal but the Judge was hesitant to take action because the charges had been so serious. After months of back and forth were able to successfully make a motion for a dismissal of the charges altogether.
State v. P.T. decided February 4, 2016
Our criminal defense attorneys recently defended a client who had been charged and arrested for distributing the popular party drug known as “Molly”. Officers arrested our client and a co-defendant after allegedly witnessing drug sales being conducted. Our client was a college student with no prior record but he was charged with a second degree crime and was facing 5 – 10 years in state prison that carries a presumption of imprisonment even as a first time offender. To make matters worse, he was an out-of-state resident of Philadelphia, and was immediately taken into custody and incarcerated in the County Jail on a $50,000 bail with no 10% option (cash or bond only). Once retained, we immediately contacted the County Superior Court and had a Bail Reduction Hearing scheduled. During that hearing, we were able to offer compelling factors to the Superior Court Judge presiding over the case and were successful in getting the bail reduced so our client’s family could bail him out.
In the following months, we received discovery from the court and began challenging the proof issues that the State was relying on to prosecute our client. It became evident that the police improperly tested the alleged “molly” being sold by our clients, and that they could not prove that the substance was, in fact, a narcotic. At that point, the County Prosecutor’s Office agreed to downgrade the 2nd degree distribution charges to a disorderly persons offense and sent the case back down to municipal court. This was already a tremendous victory for our client because he no longer faced the very real possibility of mandatory prison incarceration and a felony record. However, once in municipal court we continued to press the State on their weaknesses in the case and we were ultimately able to the resolve the matter when we got the municipal prosecutor to a downgrade the drug charge to a municipal ordinance violation. Municipal ordinances to do not carry any record and are typically only punishable by a fine. Our client was able to walk out of court after only paying a small fine and with no criminal record after he once faced mandatory state prison incarceration of up to 10 years. Needless to say, it was a life changing event for him. If you or your loved one has been charged or arrested for drug distribution in New Jersey, contact our office today at (201) 793-8018 for a free consultation to see how our criminal attorneys may be able to help you.
State v. I.I.
Our office recently defended a client who had been charged with several serious drug distribution charges including second degree distribution of marijuana within 500 ft of public park, third degree marijuana distribution within a school zone, third degree marijuana distribution, possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. Our client was pulled over because the car he was driving was allegedly involved in a crime earlier in the day. Upon stopping our client, police searched his car because they said they smelled marijuana in the vehicle which gave them probable cause. A search of his car ended up turning up a substantial amount of marijuana in the trunk and he was arrested.
After his arrest, our client and his father came into our office and explained the situation to one our New Jersey drug defense attorneys who explained how we can help. To make matters worse, aside from facing mandatory state prison for the second degree charge, we quickly learned that our client was not a U.S. citizen and any conviction could lead to serious immigration consequences or possible deportation. So our criminal defense lawyers challenged the state’s case against our client and eventually negotiated that the charges be downgraded from second degree to a disorderly persons offense of simple possession of marijuana. From there we were able to secure a conditional discharge that did not result in a guilty plea or admission of guilt so that it would not affect his immigration status. This means that at the end of the six months, the charges will be dismissed in their entirety.
State v. A.G. decided June 14, 2017