Case Successes

Se Habla Español

Call Today for a Free Consultation

203-348-5846

24 Hoyt Street, Stamford, CT 06905

Case Successes

 

David V - Mr. V was charged with several counts of Sexual Contact with a seven (7) year old including Sexual Assault II and Risk of Injury. Ultimately he entered pleas to one count of Sex Assault IV and one count of Risk of Injury. He was given a sentence cap of two years with the right on behalf of the defense to argue for less. After preparation and submission of an extensive defense memo with attachments illustrating the type of productive life that Mr. V had led prior to and following this isolated incident I was able to help Mr. V avoid any jail sentence whatsoever.


Christopher S - This was a bizarre case where a young man with no prior criminal involvement whatsoever was allegedly involved in a series of events as follows: It was alleged Mr. Smith became very drunk, broke into and stole a car from a gas station approximately a mile and half from where he was last seen, drove the car down a main street in Stamford, CT striking several vehicles along the way and ended in a severe crash with another vehicle. Then Mr. S is alleged to have fled on foot, run for approximately another half a mile and then swam across a river and was then caught by the police. The client had absolutely no recollection of anything that happened after leaving the bar with his friends to when he was face down being handcuffed shirtless by the police. After extensive preparation and presentation Mr. Smith was granted Accelerated Rehabilitation and was able to avoid a criminal record.


In Re Christopher V. 207 Conn. 270 - A juvenile court judge decided to impose consecutive commitments (sentences) upon a previously committed youth who had escaped from placement. When I respectfully tried to explain to the Court that this was not permissible under CT law, he replied words to the effect that we’ll see about that. I filed an appeal and the CT Supreme Court unanimously clarified that indeed consecutive juvenile commitments were not permissible under the law and reversed the lower court judge’s incorrect ruling.


Robert Half vs. David V - Mr. V was employed by Robert Half as a placement counselor. The Robert Half employment agreement provided specifically that an employee in this capacity may not for a period of one year after leaving Robert Half go into direct competition with Robert Half. Mr. V left the Robert Half office in Stamford and relocated to his home in Trumbull where he did in fact establish a competing business. On a motion for preliminary injunction argued before the Superior Court in Bridgeport, the Judge granted Robert Half’s motion for a preliminary injunction, shut Mr. V’s new business concern down and ordered that Mr. V not engage in any business which was in competition with Robert Half.


Ivan S - Ivan S was charged with Felony Murder, Robbery I, Burglary III, and various other counts. In addition he was charged with Sexual Contact with a Minor. Prior to the hiring of counsel Mr. S was advised of his rights both in English and Spanish and gave a three hour videotaped confession in which he admitted essentially to beating a Laundromat attendant to death together with another person. He was offered a life sentence based upon the strength of the state’s case. During my investigation I learned that Mr. S’s mother had sent an attorney to the police department at some point after he had commenced his confession. The Attorney was repeatedly told by the desk sergeant that Mr. S was not there. I filed a Motion to Suppress his confession seeking to have the confession thrown out. Based upon a series of further court hearings the state reduced its offer to 25 years which is the mandatory minimum for a charge of felony murder.


Ivan S - Ivan S was charged with Felony Murder, Robbery I, Burglary III, and various other counts. In addition he was charged with Sexual Contact with a Minor. Prior to the hiring of counsel Mr. S was advised of his rights both in English and Spanish and gave a three hour videotaped confession in which he admitted essentially to beating a Laundromat attendant to death together with another person. He was offered a life sentence based upon the strength of the state’s case. During my investigation I learned that Mr. S’s mother had sent an attorney to the police department at some point after he had commenced his confession. The Attorney was repeatedly told by the desk sergeant that Mr. S was not there. I filed a Motion to Suppress his confession seeking to have the confession thrown out. Based upon a series of further court hearings the state reduced its offer to 25 years which is the mandatory minimum for a charge of felony murder.


Krafick Divorce - Krafick is a seminal case in CT concerning the inclusion of out of state pension benefits in the marital estate for the purposes of divorce. Prior to Krafick the law was that if the benefits had not yet started to be paid, i.e. the party had not retired, and the benefits were not subject to division as a marital asset. Through a series of trials, appeals and post appellate proceedings that lasted approximately eight years, the CT Supreme Court changed the law and made the pension benefits a marital asset.


Krafick Divorce - Krafick is a seminal case in CT concerning the inclusion of out of state pension benefits in the marital estate for the purposes of divorce. Prior to Krafick the law was that if the benefits had not yet started to be paid, i.e. the party had not retired, and the benefits were not subject to division as a marital asset. Through a series of trials, appeals and post appellate proceedings that lasted approximately eight years, the CT Supreme Court changed the law and made the pension benefits a marital asset.


Ignacio M - Mr. M was charged with the Attempted brutal Murder of his former girlfriend. In addition he was charged with Possession of a Dangerous Weapon and Threatening. The underlying facts were that Mr. M followed his girlfriend on a public bus and when she arrived at the terminal and exited the bus he continued to follow her, slit her throat and attempted to do the same to himself. After extensive psychological testing it was revealed that a defense of lack of mental capacity was not feasible. Ultimately Mr. M pleaded guilty to one count of assault in the first degree and received a 10 year sentence instead of the possible maximum life sentence.


Rivera v. Hill - The parties executed a real estate contract of sale for the purchase of a residential property in Stamford, CT. At a later point in time the defendant Mrs. Hill arbitrarily decided that she no longer wished to sell the property. On behalf of Mrs. Rivera I brought suit against Mrs. Hill in order to compel sale of the subject premises. This matter was litigated before an attorney trial referee. During the course of the trial it was revealed that Mrs. Hill’s attorney had misrepresented without her knowledge that a mortgage extension had been granted when it had not in fact been authorized. Accordingly the trier of fact found in favor of the Defendant and denied the relief sought.


Holmes V. Mason - This was a case regarding a property jointly owned by five siblings. It was passed on to them after the death of their father. One of the siblings resided in the house and refused to pay rent or vacate the premises. A partition action was commenced seeking an order that the premises be sold. After two trials the premises was ordered to be auctioned and the expenses occasion by the one siblings refusal to vacate the premises were ordered to be paid to the other siblings from the proceeds of the sale.