Success Stories
Our attorneys defended a client who was charged with a 2nd degree Robbery and facing 5 – 10 years in state prison with a presumption of incarceration that would be subject to N.E.R.A. (serve 85% of sentence without parole). Because it was a 2nd degree crime, this meant that if he was convicted, it was assumed that he would have to go to state prison for a minimum of 5 years and serve approximately 4 years and 3 months before even being eligible for release on parole.
The robbery charges originated from allegations that our client and other defendants had shoplifted from a convenience and during their flight from the crime scene, they had assaulted store employees who had tried to stop them. The combination of the theft and the subsequent assault, changed it from an ordinary shoplifting to a strong armed robbery. The case was first sent to the Superior Court and after being reviewed by the County Prosecutor’s Office, the case was eventually downgraded and remanded to municipal court. Once in municipal court we challenged the proof issues against our client and maintained a plea of “not guilty” for our client. After no resolution could be reached, the case was eventually set for trial. On the day of trial the State was unable to meet their burden of proof that our client was in fact involved in the robbery or the original shoplifting and upon motion by the State, the charges against our client were dismissed in their entirety.
State v. ALS
Our office recently represented a client in Superior Court who had been indicted on six counts related to loan fraud scheme for $100,000. The indictment included two counts of 2nd degree Identity Theft under 2C:21-17a(1), one count of 2nd degree Theft by Deception under 2C:20-4a, 3rd degree Uttering False Documents (fake ID) under 2C:21-2.1c, 4th degree false documents under 2C:21-2.1d, and a 4th degree Hindering Apprehension under 2C:29-3b(4). The State’s allegations were that our client had entered various banks and attempted to take out a loan for $100,000 using someone else’s identity. The allegations further stated that he had presented a fake ID and other identifying information to bank personnel to prove he was in fact someone else. Shortly thereafter, he was arrested outside the bank and a fake ID was found in his possession. The evidence against him included video surveillance, numerous financial documents, the fake ID, and our client’s own admissions.
Our client had a prior criminal record and was facing a maximum of 38 years in state prison however the client was adamant that he could not serve any type of incarceration. Our criminal defense attorneys first started by challenging the prosecution’s case and examining the proofs against our client. Moreover, we provided additional information and exculpatory evidence for the State to consider that was not known at the time of grand jury presentation. In the end, we came to the conclusion that the State’s case was patently deficient because they were missing essential elements of discovery needed to prove that our client had actually taken the steps necessary to secure the fraudulent loan and that he actually possessed the criminal intent to defraud and steal from the banking institutions. The final result was that our client agreed to enter a plea to one count of 3rd degree charge of Uttering False Documents for presenting a fake ID to authorities in order to obtain some benefit. In consideration of the plea, the State moved to dismiss all remaining charges including all the three 2nd degree crimes which were the most serious, as each carried 5 – 10 years in state prison. Furthermore, at sentencing we were able to successfully argue to the judge that our client should receive only probation with no incarceration.
State v. C.K.
Our Hudson County criminal lawyers recently represented a man who had been arrested by Kearny police for 3 counts of burglary and attempted burglary after he was caught trying to enter three different parked vehicles. According to the police report, the officer was on patrol when he noticed the defendant looking into windows of parked vehicles. He then observed him begin pull the front driver’s side handles of three cars in an attempt open them. At this point the police stopped the defendant and asked him if any of those vehicles belonged to him and he said “No”. At that point police immediately placed him under arrest for criminal attempt to commit burglary. Unfortunately, our client, just like many people, did not realize that entering another’s car without their permission with the purpose to commit a crime within is actually considered a burglary just like entering someone’s house for the same purpose.
After being retained and speaking with our client it became evident that this may be a situation where alcohol lead to bad judgement and not serious criminal activity. However, there was no mistaking that the criminal charges were serious as he faced 3 different 3rd degree indictable crimes each carrying 3 – 5 years in state prison, if convicted. Our client was a former military man with no prior record and so we felt very strongly that we could not let a nightmare scenario like that happen to him. So when we initially appeared in the Hudson County Superior Court for a CJP court date, our attorneys were able to speak with the assistant prosecutor and have the charges downgraded and remanded back down to municipal court, which was a huge win right off the bat. From there we continued to fight the case down in municipal court and challenged the state’s evidence whether they could actually prove the intent to commit a burglary even assuming the police actually saw what they think they saw. After some intense negotiations back and forth, the state eventually agreed to dismiss two of the counts outright and downgrade the third to a local town ordinance which did not result in a criminal conviction. Our client was extremely happy to walk out of court with his record in tact and to avoid any jail time. If you or your loved has been charged or arrested for a similar situation, an experienced Kearny burglary attorney may be able to help. Contact our office today for a free consultation where we can answer your questions and address your concerns.
State v. K.P. decided August 24, 2017
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.
We recently defended a client who had been indicted for 3rd degree Assault by Auto under 2C:12-1(c)(2) where the State alleged that she had driven her vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and as a result of the DWI, she got into an accident with another vehicle that resulted in serious bodily injury to another. The prosecutor had strong evidence against our client including blood alcohol results, admissions from our client, extensive medical records documenting the injuries to the victim, and even a forensic expert report regarding our client’s level of intoxication.
Our client was a professional with no prior record and she would most likely lose her job if she got convicted of a felony. In order to avoid a felony conviction, we applied our her for Pre-Trial Intervention (PTI), which is a program normally reserved for first time offenders that would allow for the charges to be dismissed upon successful completion. However, the County Prosecutor’s Office denied her admission into the program based on the nature of the offense since there is a strong public interest against stopping drunk drivers from injuring others. Our attorneys appealed the denial of the PTI but were ultimately unsuccessful after a Superior Court Judge denied the application. This left us back at the beginning, facing a third degree crime punishable by 3 – 5 years in state prison. Our attorneys began prepping the case for a trial and outlined weaknesses in the State’s case against our client. Ultimately, after months of back and forth we were able to avoid the inherent risks of a trial and secure a downgrade of the assault by auto from a third degree crime to a disorderly person offense (equivalent to a misdemeanor). This allowed our client to walk out of court and avoid a felony record and potential state prison incarceration. If you would like to learn how we may be able to help you or your loved with an assault by auto charge, contact our office today at (201) 793-8018 for a completely free consultation where you can speak with an experienced criminal attorney.
State v. J.P.
Our office recently defended a client who had been charged with Terroristic Threats, which is a third degree crime that carries up to 3 – 5 years in state prison if convicted. The charges originated from an argument between two former friends and our client was alleged to have made threats to the victim and then sent a picture of a gun to the victim which put the victim in fear for his life. These scenarios involving charges for Harassment and Terroristic Threats have become much more common because of the widespread use of cell phones and social media where people can easily send text messages and pictures back and forth and easily get themselves in trouble.
The case was first sent to the Hudson County Superior Court where it was later remanded by the Prosecutor’s Office from terroristic threats to the lesser charge of harassment, which is a petty disorderly persons offense. This alone would be considered a huge win for our client but our attorneys did not stop there. Once in municipal court we were able to further challenge the case against our client so that it was eventually dismissed altogether. Our client went from looking at state prison and a permanent felony record to being able to walk out of court with no criminal record or without even paying a fine. If you or your loved one has been charged with Terroristic Threats, contact our office today at (201) 793-8018 for a free consultation to learn more about how our attorneys may be able to help.
Our office recently defended a client who was facing a mandatory 20 year suspension of his license and a mandatory 6 months in county jail. This was the result of our client being charged with his third offense for driving while intoxicated. To make matters worse, after being arrested and charged with DWI based on his field sobriety tests, he refused to take the Alcotest machine (Breathalyzer). This resulted in him being charged with both a DWI and Refusal – each punishable by a mandatory 10 year suspension and 6 months in county jail for the DWI.
Needless to say, his life and livelihood was on the line, in every sense of the meaning. The prosecutor was unwilling to bend and offer any plea deals so we prepared for trial. On the day of trial our attorneys made a motion before the court to dismiss for lack of prosecution because the State was unable to prove their case against our client. After hearing oral arguments from both sides, the judge agreed with our motion and dismissed the charges against our client. He was able to walk out of the courthouse without doing any jail, paying any fines or even losing his license for even a day. If you or a loved one has been charged with a DWI, DUI, or Refusal then contact our office today at (201) 793-8018 for a free consultation with one of our experienced defense lawyers who can analyze your case and explain your options.
Kearny Nj Cyber Harassment Lawyer
We have been systemically seeing an increase in defendants charged with cyber harassment rather than just regular harassment if the alleged actions involve social media posts or emails. In a recent case our office defended a client against cyber harassment charges related to a business deal gone wrong. Our client was a business professional with a long history in the insurance industry. The case arose when our client signed up for a course to obtain additional certifications in the his field of insurance practice. However, after reading up on the company providing the insurance course he decided to withdraw after reading several negative reviews. The only problem was he had already paid a down payment fee for the course and, as no surprise, the company did not want to refund the money. This started a war of words and several email exchanges of our client calling them crooks for what they had done and threatening to put them on blast on social media and other public forum sites for business reviews. In response to these emails, the representative from the company went to the police and filed a charge for cyber harassment under 2C:33-4.1 which is a crime of the fourth degree. Ironically, the company ended up refunding the money to our client before we even went to court, which arguably was because they were never entitled to keep it in the first place.
Cyber-harassment Charges in Hudson County, NJ
The biggest problem for defendants facing cyber harassment is that it turns a simple internet argument into a fourth degree indictable crime (felony) punishable by up to 18 months in state prison. Moreover since its an indictable crime you will be required to appear in the Hudson County Superior Court – and that’s exactly what happened in this case. After our client was charged and served with the complaint we appeared in superior court for an initial appearance referred to as CJP (Criminal Judicial Processing). Appearing in CJP can be an integral part of handling any indictable case because it is the process where the prosecutor’s office screens the cases by reviewing the facts and determining whether they will keep the case at the superior court or consider remanding it back down to municipal court as a lesser charge. At the time we appeared in CJP, we were able speak with the prosecutor about the disputed facts of the case and how the alleged victim had actually taken advantage of our client. After an extensive conversation, the prosecutor agreed to downgrade our client’s charges and sent the case back down to Kearny municipal court to be further litigated in the coming weeks. A few weeks later, and prior to appearing in Kearny, we followed up with the municipal court to ensure that the alleged victim had been subpoenaed so any issues and disputed facts could be addressed by both parties when we appeared. However, once we arrived in court it became obvious that the victim had not shown up even though he was noticed to be there. Based on his disregard of the court’s subpoena, we made a motion before the judge to dismiss the case for lack of prosecution which was granted. Then after the dismissal, while still in court, we immediately applied our client for an expedited expungement to erase the arrest from his record.
State v. K.M. decided May 24, 2018
At William Proetta Criminal Law, our DUI defense attorneys pride themselves in beating driving while intoxicated charges in New Jersey. DWI defense is a niche area of law that requires a great deal of skill and experience pertaining to standardized field sobriety testing (SFST’s) and the Alcotest (New Jersey’s Breathalyzer). New Jersey has the reputation as being one of the toughest DUI state’s in the entire country. This is because New Jersey does not allow any form of plea bargaining for defendants who have been arrested for drunk driving. Moreover, unlike other states, New Jersey requires a mandatory suspension of your driver’s license for upwards of 1 year even for a first time offender. To make matters worse, our state does not allow for a jury trial on DWI charges so your fate will be left in the hands of the municipal court judge. This means that the best defense is an aggressive offense to attack the State’s case against you and pinpointing weaknesses in the proofs that can be used to create leverage and establish a reasonable doubt.
In the last month alone, our lawyers have achieved some amazing results for our clients, which includes 5 DWI dismissals for five separate clients. This is an impressive feat no matter how you look at it and something that very few of the most experienced New Jersey DUI attorneys can claim, if any. The five DUI dismissals in question even included a client charged with a 2nd offense DWI and another arrested for a Drug DUI. Moreover, it bears mentioning that our attorneys achieved other noteworthy results this past month, including securing a client no jail time on a 3rd offense DWI where she faced a mandatory 6 months incarceration and successfully arguing for a suppression of a 0.19% BAC for another client which secured him a 90 day loss of license where he faced a mandatory suspension of 7 months to 1 year and an ignition interlock device in his vehicle during the time of a suspicion and 6 – 12 months following his suspension.
These results are extraordinary but they are not uncommon for our New Jersey DWI attorneys. If you or your loved one has been arrested for a DWI in New Jersey and you would like to learn more about how we may be able to help you, then contact our office today at (201) 793-8018 for a free consultation with an experienced DUI lawyer.
State v. K.M. (DWI 2nd Offense) Dismissed
State v. I.T. (Drug DWI) Dismissed
State v. N.G. (DWI 1st Offense) Dismissed
State v. M.P. (DWI 1st Offense) Dismissed
State v. R.C. (DWI 1st Offense) Dismissed
State v. V.M. (DWI 3rd Offense) No Jail
State v. K.A. (DWI 1st Offense) 0.19% Reading Suppressed
Our Hudson County criminal defense lawyers recently defended a client who had been arrested outside his residence after committing an alleged car burglary. The whole incident happened after a police officer had allegedly spotted our client peering into car windows and attempting to enter various vehicles parked along the road. The police had been watching this area because in recent weeks there had been several car burglaries with no forced entry reported by residents. After watching him try to gain entry into a second vehicle, the police officer stopped him for questioning. Our client was adamant that he had done nothing wrong and the police was mistaken it what he had witnessed. However, our client was admittedly very intoxicated and a heated exchange between him and the police took place leading up to his arrest. After assessing the evidence, the police decided to charge him with a third degree felony for Burglary under 2C:18-2a and Conspiracy to commit the Burglary under 2C:5-1a(1). These charges carried a sentence of up to 3 – 5 years in state prison and, although our client was a professional, he had already exhausted his Pre-Trial Intervention years earlier while in college so he was not eligible for a diversion program.
Based on the above facts, our client could absolutely not afford a felony conviction or the possibility of incarceration because he would no doubt lose his job. This meant that we had to challenge the evidence against our client in order to achieve a dismissal or substantial downgrade. We first appeared in Hudson County Superior Court where we were able to secure a substantial downgrade of the burglary charge down to a disorderly persons offense of trespass. From there the case was remanded to the municipal court to be prosecuted. Once the case was transferred back to municipal court, we were able to have the case further downgraded to a local town ordinance after speaking with the prosecutor and arresting officers. This was a huge win for our client because the ordinance did not result in a criminal conviction on his record and was only punishable by fine.
State v. G.R. decided on August 16, 2017