{"id":3445,"date":"2021-03-12T19:57:32","date_gmt":"2021-03-12T19:57:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/?page_id=3445"},"modified":"2026-04-24T02:24:06","modified_gmt":"2026-04-24T02:24:06","slug":"case-results","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/?page_id=3445","title":{"rendered":"Case Results"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/span><\/span>Over 2,500+ Cases<\/span>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

<\/span><\/span>John Teakell Case Results: Proven Success in Dallas Federal Criminal Defense<\/h1>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\n\n\nFederal Criminal Defense Case Results | John R. Teakell<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Browse John R. Teakell's federal criminal defense case results by practice area and year. Dismissals, declined charges, reduced sentences, and favorable outcomes across white collar, SEC, tax, drug, and federal cases.\">\n<link rel=\"preconnect\" href=\"https:\/\/fonts.googleapis.com\">\n<link rel=\"preconnect\" href=\"https:\/\/fonts.gstatic.com\" crossorigin>\n<link href=\"https:\/\/fonts.googleapis.com\/css2?family=Libre+Baskerville:wght@400;700&display=swap\" rel=\"stylesheet\">\n<style>\n :root {\n --gold: #b8935a;\n --gold-dark: #9a7a46;\n --gold-soft: #d9c7a5;\n --navy: #1e2a42;\n --cream: #faf6ee;\n --line: #e6dcc4;\n --text: #2a2a2a;\n --text-soft: #4a4a4a;\n --white: #ffffff;\n }\n\n * { box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0; padding: 0; }\n html { scroll-behavior: smooth; }\n body {\n font-family: 'Libre Baskerville', Georgia, serif;\n color: var(--text);\n line-height: 1.75;\n background: var(--white);\n font-size: 16px;\n -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased;\n }\n\n \/* ---------- PAGE HEADER ---------- *\/\n .page-header {\n text-align: center;\n padding: 72px 24px 48px;\n border-bottom: 1px solid var(--line);\n max-width: 1200px;\n margin: 0 auto;\n }\n .page-header .eyebrow {\n font-size: 13px;\n color: var(--gold);\n letter-spacing: 0.08em;\n text-transform: uppercase;\n margin-bottom: 14px;\n display: block;\n }\n .page-header h1 {\n font-size: 42px;\n color: var(--navy);\n font-weight: 700;\n line-height: 1.2;\n margin-bottom: 20px;\n }\n .page-header p {\n font-size: 15px;\n color: var(--text-soft);\n max-width: 720px;\n margin: 0 auto;\n line-height: 1.8;\n }\n\n \/* ---------- MAIN LAYOUT ---------- *\/\n .case-layout {\n max-width: 1280px;\n margin: 0 auto;\n padding: 56px 24px 96px;\n display: grid;\n grid-template-columns: 280px 1fr;\n gap: 64px;\n align-items: start;\n }\n .sidebar { grid-column: 1; }\n .results { grid-column: 2; }\n\n \/* ---------- SIDEBAR ---------- *\/\n .sidebar {\n position: sticky;\n top: 20px;\n max-height: calc(100vh - 40px);\n overflow-y: auto;\n padding-right: 12px;\n scrollbar-width: thin;\n scrollbar-color: var(--gold-soft) transparent;\n }\n \/* JS-applied when sticky fails in host environments (e.g. WordPress themes) *\/\n .sidebar.is-pinned {\n position: fixed !important;\n }\n .sidebar::-webkit-scrollbar {\n width: 6px;\n }\n .sidebar::-webkit-scrollbar-track {\n background: transparent;\n }\n .sidebar::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb {\n background: var(--gold-soft);\n border-radius: 3px;\n }\n .sidebar::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover {\n background: var(--gold);\n }\n .sidebar h2 {\n font-size: 22px;\n color: var(--navy);\n font-weight: 700;\n margin-bottom: 20px;\n padding-bottom: 12px;\n border-bottom: 1px solid var(--gold-soft);\n }\n .sidebar .filter-group {\n margin-bottom: 44px;\n }\n .filter-item {\n display: block;\n width: 100%;\n text-align: left;\n background: transparent;\n border: none;\n border-left: 3px solid transparent;\n padding: 10px 14px;\n font-family: inherit;\n font-size: 14px;\n color: var(--gold);\n cursor: pointer;\n line-height: 1.5;\n transition: background 0.2s ease, color 0.2s ease, border-color 0.2s ease;\n }\n .filter-item:hover {\n background: var(--cream);\n color: var(--gold-dark);\n }\n .filter-item.active {\n background: var(--cream);\n border-left-color: var(--gold);\n color: var(--navy);\n font-weight: 700;\n }\n .filter-item .count {\n color: var(--text-soft);\n font-size: 12px;\n font-weight: 400;\n }\n\n \/* ---------- RESULTS AREA ---------- *\/\n .results { min-width: 0; }\n .results-header {\n padding-bottom: 20px;\n border-bottom: 1px solid var(--line);\n margin-bottom: 32px;\n }\n .results-title {\n font-size: 22px;\n color: var(--gold);\n letter-spacing: 0.06em;\n text-transform: uppercase;\n font-weight: 700;\n }\n .results-count {\n font-size: 13px;\n color: var(--text-soft);\n margin-top: 6px;\n }\n\n \/* ---------- CASE CARDS ---------- *\/\n .case-card {\n padding: 24px 0 24px 24px;\n border-left: 2px solid var(--gold-soft);\n margin-bottom: 32px;\n transition: border-color 0.2s ease;\n }\n .case-card:hover { border-left-color: var(--gold); }\n .case-title {\n font-size: 22px;\n color: var(--navy);\n font-weight: 700;\n margin-bottom: 6px;\n line-height: 1.3;\n }\n .case-year {\n font-size: 14px;\n color: var(--gold);\n font-weight: 700;\n margin-bottom: 14px;\n letter-spacing: 0.04em;\n }\n .case-desc {\n font-size: 15px;\n color: var(--text-soft);\n line-height: 1.8;\n }\n\n .no-results {\n padding: 60px 20px;\n text-align: center;\n color: var(--text-soft);\n font-size: 15px;\n }\n\n \/* ---------- RESPONSIVE ---------- *\/\n @media (max-width: 900px) {\n .case-layout {\n grid-template-columns: 1fr;\n gap: 40px;\n }\n .sidebar { position: static; }\n .page-header h1 { font-size: 32px; }\n }\n @media (max-width: 560px) {\n .case-title { font-size: 18px; }\n .page-header { padding: 48px 20px 36px; }\n }\n<\/style>\n<\/head>\n<body>\n\n<header class=\"page-header\">\n <span class=\"eyebrow\">Proven Outcomes Across Federal & State Court<\/span>\n <h1>Federal Criminal Defense Case Results Examples<\/h1>\n <p>Each year, John R. Teakell handles hundreds of complex federal, white-collar, and state criminal cases. The results below represent actual outcomes achieved for clients \u2014 dismissals, declined charges, reduced sentences, and favorable rulings across every practice area.<\/p>\n<\/header>\n\n<div class=\"case-layout\">\n\n <!-- SIDEBAR: FILTERS -->\n <aside class=\"sidebar\" aria-label=\"Filter case results\">\n\n <div class=\"filter-group\" role=\"group\" aria-label=\"Practice Area filter\">\n <h2>Practice Area<\/h2>\n <button class=\"filter-item active\" data-area=\"all\">All Practice Areas<\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"federal-defense\">Federal Criminal Defense <span class=\"count\">(74)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"white-collar\">White Collar and Financial Crimes <span class=\"count\">(22)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"health-care-fraud\">Health Care Fraud <span class=\"count\">(4)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"tax-crimes\">Tax Crimes & IRS Investigations <span class=\"count\">(9)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"identity-passport\">Identity, Passport, & Information Offenses <span class=\"count\">(13)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"money-laundering\">Money Laundering <span class=\"count\">(6)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"drug-offenses\">Drug Offenses & Controlled Substances <span class=\"count\">(27)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"immigration-smuggling\">Immigration & Human Smuggling <span class=\"count\">(7)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"firearms-weapons\">Firearms & Weapons <span class=\"count\">(12)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"assault-violent\">Assault, Violent Offenses, & Related <span class=\"count\">(19)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"prostitution-solicitation\">Prostitution or Solicitation <span class=\"count\">(4)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"theft-fraud-property\">Theft, Fraud & Property Crimes <span class=\"count\">(33)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"school-juvenile\">School, Juvenile, & Education-Related Matters <span class=\"count\">(1)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"cps-family\">CPS & Family-Related Investigations <span class=\"count\">(3)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"forfeiture-seizures\">Forfeiture, Seizures, and Return of Property <span class=\"count\">(6)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"civil-regulatory\">Civil and Regulatory Investigations <span class=\"count\">(7)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"injunctions-business\">Injunctions and Business Torts <span class=\"count\">(2)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"contempt-probation\">Contempt, Probation, Supervision, Release Conditions <span class=\"count\">(19)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"human-services-benefits\">Human Services & Benefits <span class=\"count\">(6)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-area=\"government-investigations\">Government Investigations <span class=\"count\">(34)<\/span><\/button>\n <\/div>\n\n <div class=\"filter-group\" role=\"group\" aria-label=\"Year filter\">\n <h2>Year<\/h2>\n <button class=\"filter-item active\" data-year=\"all\">All Years<\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2026\">2026 <span class=\"count\">(7)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2025\">2025 <span class=\"count\">(11)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2024\">2024 <span class=\"count\">(14)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2023\">2023 <span class=\"count\">(21)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2022\">2022 <span class=\"count\">(12)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2021\">2021 <span class=\"count\">(18)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2020\">2020 <span class=\"count\">(12)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2019\">2019 <span class=\"count\">(14)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2018\">2018 <span class=\"count\">(13)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2017\">2017 <span class=\"count\">(11)<\/span><\/button>\n <button class=\"filter-item\" data-year=\"2016\">2016 <span class=\"count\">(7)<\/span><\/button>\n <\/div>\n\n <\/aside>\n\n <!-- RESULTS -->\n <main class=\"results\">\n <div class=\"results-header\">\n <div class=\"results-title\" id=\"results-title\">All Practice Areas<\/div>\n <div class=\"results-count\" id=\"results-count\">140 cases shown<\/div>\n <\/div>\n\n <div id=\"cases-container\">\n \n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2026\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2026<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re BW. Client was indicted for Theft of Property $2,500 \u2013 $30,000 from activity centering on payment for a business expense from client's business account. The payment was returned, and client was charged in state court in Dallas County. After negotiations, the District Attorney's Office dismissed the charge \/ case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2026\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Early Termination of Federal Supervised Release<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2026<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re AA. Client was on Supervised Release for five (5) years after his conviction for Wire Fraud. Focusing on positive factors and client's compliance, the defense moved the court to terminate the Supervised Release after Client had completed a portion of the supervision. The court granted the motion, terminating the remaining supervision.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2026\" data-areas=\"federal-defense firearms-weapons government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2026<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Federal investigation in the Eastern District of Texas, re MG. The United States Attorney's Office and agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms investigated sales of firearms using other persons' names, or "straw purchases" of firearms, meaning buying weapons for another person or persons and not using their real name(s), knowing this at the time of the purchases. The investigation focused also on the fact that firearms were being sent \/ sold to persons in foreign countries. After various presentations to the case agents and the federal prosecutor, the investigation was closed with no action against the Client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2026\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property civil-regulatory\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Civil Action<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2026<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Northern District of Texas, re Counterfeited Goods and Copyright Infringement, re JR. Client sold boutique items that were brand name merchandise, without obtaining a license or permission to do so. Defense made presentations that indicated Client's s lack of knowledge of information products and the sources of the products.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2026\" data-areas=\"federal-defense drug-offenses contempt-probation government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Federal Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2026<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Northern District of Texas, re Counterfeited Goods Trafficking, re JR. Client was originally under federal criminal investigation regarding sales of brand name merchandise without permission to do so. These products are sometimes referred to as knock-off items. Although this matter was originally a federal investigation, after presentations to downplay the Client's understanding, and to emphasize the smaller amounts compared to other cases, the case was not prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's Office. Generally, federal prosecutions are more likely to result in harsher sentences upon conviction. Rather, the case was prosecuted in Texas state court, where the Client received a deferred adjudication sentence (probation which will result in a dismissal when the Client successfully completes the probation).<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2026\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Much Reduced Sentence in Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2026<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Northern District of Alabama, re NC. The United States Attorney's Office and agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation charged the client as a part of a Conspiracy to Commit Fraud, based on a "refund fraud" scheme or "refund scheme." The refund fraud alleged was an effort to purchase many items, claim a refund, and keep the refunded to sell for a profit. The government alleged that the scheme refund totals were between $1.5 million and $3.5 million. If the client had been convicted at trial, he could possibly have faced 70 + to 100+ months incarceration. Through presentations and advocacy to lower the loss amount for which client was responsible, and to lower the potential sentence for other reasons, the court sentenced client to eight (8) months incarceration, no fine, and no restitution payment.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2026\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Reduced Charge<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2026<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Tarrant County, Texas, re AW. Client was charged with a felony case of Possession of a Controlled Substance. Through negotiations, the District Attorney's Office reduced the charge to a misdemeanor, and further, being a Class C misdemeanor. The Class C misdemeanor is the equivalent of a municipal court citation, such as a speeding ticket.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Tarrant County, TX, re CL. Client was under investigation regarding leaving the scene of a vehicle accident. Presentations to the investigator resulted in a declination of the case, with no charges or actions against the potential defendant.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"federal-defense drug-offenses civil-regulatory\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Northern District of Texas, Northern District of California, re AS. Client was approached by federal agents concerning allegations of fraud and misrepresentations concerning the marketing of a product that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) deemed should have been approved and registered through the FDA. After discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office and presentations of documents and other evidence, the government declined to include the Client in criminal action.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Contempt of Court<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Bexar County, TX, re NV. Client had a motion for contempt against him for failures to comply with the court's order. After continued negotiations and presentations, the case was settled without any contempt finding against the Client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"immigration-smuggling assault-violent contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Prison \/ No Incarceration<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Uvalde County, TX, re RD. Client was charged with human smuggling \/ illegal alien smuggling that resulted in bodily injury or potential serious bodily injury. The initial action sought by the prosecution was prison time. However, after continued negotiations and clarifications, the case was disposed with the Client being on supervision.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Ellis County, Texas, re CH. Client was charged with assault of a person, who had sustained some bodily injury. After presentations of evidence that the injury was likely from something else, the District Attorney's Office agreed to dismiss the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, TX, re GG. Client was under surveillance and investigation for alleged illegal drug activities. After discussions with the investigator, the investigation was eventually closed with no charges against the Client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Obtained a Federal Managerial Variable<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Northern District of Texas, re NR. Client was sentenced on a white-collar federal criminal case after cooperating with the government, including the Federal Correctional Institute where he was housed prior to the disposition of his case. After his cooperation became known to the inmate population, the court granted the defense motion for a Bureau of Prisons Managerial Variable, ordering the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to lower Client's security level calculation needed by the BOP to determine where to send \/ house him as an inmate. This means that the judge's order granted the request to consider the Client to be a lower security risk calculation, that would cause him to be sent to a lower security level institution.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, TX, re LO. Law enforcement found an illegal, controlled substance at or near the Client's residence. The defense was able to provide sufficient information and rebuttals to cause the detective and prosecution to abandon charges from the incident.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property injunctions-business\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Injunction on Oil Embezzlement \/ Theft<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Atascosa County, TX, re VOG. Client company's employees \/ contractors were selling company oil inventory in a different name, diverting oil sales and proceeds from these sales to themselves. Obtained an injunction and order freezing perpetrators' accounts, with the exact amount of loss and recovery to be determined.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"identity-passport\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Andrews County, TX, re TM. Client was indicted for Possession \/ Use of Identifying Information, and the judge heard the defense motion to dismiss \/ set aside the Indictment. After presenting evidence and showing the court the legal reasons to dismiss or set aside the Indictment, the judge granted the motion. The evidence and arguments presented included a legal defense, which was a bar to prosecution.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2025\" data-areas=\"contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Withdrawal \/ Dismissal of Motion to Revoke Probation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2025<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Johnson County, TX, re RF. Client was on supervision in Johnson County, Texas for a criminal case, and the State moved to adjudicate \/ revoke the probation. After presentations and proposals, the District Attorney's Office withdrew their motion, and the client is moving forward to finish probation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Sentence Below U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Recommendation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, re CM. Client was indicted, and for sentencing, the client faced a very significant amount of incarceration time, as recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines. At sentencing, the court varied downward from the recommended imprisonment range at the defense's request based on various personal factors, including health issues and client's addiction.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissals<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re HG. Client was indicted for a conspiracy \/ scheme to steal and sell electronics, including cell phones. The State dismissed the charges of robbery and engaging in organized criminal activity.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Revocations<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas re CH. Client stood to be revoked on several pending probations based on new alleged activity and new Indictments for other charges. Per negotiations and presentations of evidence, the State withdrew the revocation motions and continued client on supervision.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense identity-passport government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 U.S. State Department regarding potential federal court, Western District of Texas, El Paso Division, re. EC. Client was under investigation for alleged false statement regarding renewing a passport application. After presentations to the case agent, the investigation was closed with no action.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Grayson County, Texas, re MJ. Client was initially arrested on a felony charge of assault, and from early presentations, the District Attorney's Office only charged a misdemeanor. After continued presentations of evidence and discussions, the District Attorney's Office outright dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Ellis County, Texas, re MG. Client was charged with possession of marijuana. The Ellis County District Attorney, after much discussion, dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense identity-passport\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Lower U.S. Sentencing Guidelines<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division, re DA. Client was indicted for passport fraud from false statements on the applications and using false identification. From negotiations with the U.S. Attorney, a more crucial charge was dismissed, which led to a significantly lower sentence from the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines recommendation. Client was essentially sentenced to time served.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense money-laundering drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Sentence Below U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Recommendation \/ Variance<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, re WL. Client was charged with Money Laundering in relation to drug trafficking, specifically being a drug and money courier. Client's U.S. Sentencing Guidelines imprisonment recommendation range was 70 \u2013 87 months incarceration. Defense advised the court of factors favorable for sentencing, and the judge granted the defense request to vary downward from the Sentencing Guidelines range. The client was sentenced to 34 months.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"prostitution-solicitation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ Grand Jury No-Bill<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re TW. Client was arrested for solicitation of prostitution. After discussions with the District Attorney's Office and evidence favorable to the defendant \/ client, the grand jury refused to indict \/ formally charge the client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"firearms-weapons\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ Grand Jury No-Bill<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re TW. Client was arrested for Felon in Possession of a Firearm. After presenting evidence in favor of the client \/ defendant, the grand jury refused to indict \/ formally charge my client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Federal Plea Offer with U.S. Attorney's Office Not Opposing Probation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, re LB. Client was charged with a mortgage fraud scheme that involved various real properties, with a large amount alleged as the dollar loss. Although the government alleged a complex scheme that would calculate to a significant amount of prison time from the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, after many contacts with the U.S. Attorney's Office advocating for the client, the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed to not oppose probation at sentencing.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ Declined Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Travis County, Texas, re SJ. Client was investigated for an alleged automobile floor planning scheme for automobile funding for vehicles sold through car dealers. The fraud allegations were that Client and others made false statements about financing and the status of the vehicles as collateral, as some vehicles had already been sold and not reported to the lenders. After defense presentations to the Travis County District Attorney's Office showing the Client was not involved, the District Attorney's Office declined to prosecute Client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ Declined Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 U.S. Attorney's Office, Western District of Texas, Waco Division, re FN. Client was under investigation for allegations of misrepresentations in a Paycheck Protection Program (Small Business Administration-backed loans) loan application, yet the defense was able to show that Client did use PPP monies for business expenses.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2024\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property civil-regulatory government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Civil Action<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2024<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Southern District of New York or Eastern District of Texas, re Counterfeited Goods and Copyright Infringement, re KF. Client sold retail items that carried a brand name on the merchandise without obtaining a license or permission to do so. Defense made presentations that indicated Client's s lack of knowledge of \/ information about key facts, and the parties settled without a lawsuit or a government criminal investigation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Sentence Below U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Recommendation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re AL. Client was indicted, and at sentencing, client faced a recommended sentence of a life imprisonment per the Sentencing Guidelines calculations. However, the plea and plea agreement, accepted by the court, provided for a statutory maximum of 20 years incarceration. Thus, the Client was not given a life sentence, but the 20 years due to the plea agreement entered into in the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Conditional Dismissals<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Wise County, Texas, re JC. Client was indicted for a felony possession of a controlled substance and a misdemeanor drug charge. From negotiations, the District and County Attorney's Offices agreed to conditional dismissals, conditioned upon community service and other conditions to reach the dismissals.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re. SJ. Client was under investigation for alleged participation in an automobile floor planning scheme \/ conspiracy, wherein the participants obtained funding for automobiles that they sold through car dealers, making false statements about the status of financing and the status of the vehicles as collateral for lending. After presentations by the defense, the U.S. Attorney has declined to prosecute client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Charge Reduced to Class C Misdemeanor<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Grayson County, Texas, re DW. After continued negotiations, Client's state case charge was reduced to a Class C misdemeanor, which are how traffic citations \/ moving violations are charged.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Federal Sentence Less Than Sentencing Guidelines<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re AS. Client's U.S. Sentencing Guidelines' calculation recommendation was 262 \u2013 327 months as originally written in the Pre-Sentence Report. (Per negotiations, the plea agreement capped the Client at 240 months maximum.) After advocating at sentencing that an enhancement added to the calculations should not apply, the Court agreed, which reduced Sentencing Guidelines' calculations to 188 \u2013 235 months. The client was sentenced to 188 months, much less than what the sentence could have been imposed.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense drug-offenses civil-regulatory government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, re PH. Client was under criminal investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office and agents of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for alleged sales and transportation of wellness products and devices that were not FDA approved. After providing company histories, records, and updated company information, the U.S. Attorney declined prosecution and closed the matter without any action.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar tax-crimes theft-fraud-property contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Probation in a Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re. JM. Client pled guilty to Bank Theft instead of proceeding to trial. The allegations were that checks deposited into and through client's accounts were from a tax fraud scheme. Client was sentenced to probation although the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines' sentencing recommendation was for at least 33 \u2013 41 months' imprisonment.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense money-laundering drug-offenses government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Eastern District of Texas, Sherman \/ Plano Division, re EC. Client and her company were under criminal investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office and agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for alleged money laundering. The investigation started after an employee began accepting illegally obtained monies for the payment of company products, while not known by the Client. The unlawful employee kept the tainted money payments off company records to not alert the Client. After defense presentations to the U.S. Attorney's Office and the DEA showing that the employee's actions were his and not the Client's involvement, the prosecution agreed to not proceed against Client regarding criminal charges and closed the criminal investigation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense tax-crimes government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re MC. Client was the subject of an IRS \u2013 Criminal Investigation Division criminal investigation into a tax preparation company where she was a lead tax preparer for people who paid the company to complete and file their federal tax returns. The allegations were making false statements with \/ for clients on tax returns and filing false tax returns. After submitting information to the U.S. Attorney's Office clarifying what the Client did and at whose direction she worked, the U.S. Attorney's Office agreed to not seek any criminal charge against Client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense tax-crimes government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Not a Target \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re AD. Client was the subject \/ possible subject of an IRS \u2013 Criminal Investigation Division tax preparation investigation where Client worked for the main target of the investigation at the tax preparation service. Allegations were that employees were knowingly preparing false tax returns for customers for a fee. After discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office and agents, and after providing information about the workings of the office, the U.S. Attorney's Office declined to consider Client a target of the investigation. Client will not be subject to prosecution.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses theft-fraud-property government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Not a Target of Investigation \/ No Prosecution<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Cameron County, Texas, re JL. Client's records were subpoenaed, and he was under investigation regarding THC products and marijuana trafficking. After providing information that the client's company and products are being counterfeited and counterfeit products are being sold in Texas, the District Attorney's Office declined to proceed with further investigation of Client or prosecution.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re MG. Client was charged in state court in Dallas County for Burglary of a Vehicle. After continued discussions with the District Attorney's Office, the District Attorney dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Tarrant County, Texas, re PS. Client was charged in state court in Tarrant County with Assault \u2013 Bodily Injury. After providing statements and other evidence, the District Attorney's Office dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Criminal Referral<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 U.S. Attorney's Office \u2013 Western District of Texas \/ Bexar County District Attorney's Office, re JS. Client was accused of theft, embezzlement, and fraud while he was the financial officer and operating officer of a company. Continued presentations and discussions caused the company to retract any criminal referrals.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Hill County, Texas, re MG. Client was charged with Failure to Identify with Intent to Give False Information. Defendant was charged after stop by law enforcement, and the District Attorney outright dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"assault-violent cps-family\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Ovilla, Ellis County, Texas, re OE. Client was charged with Assault \u2013 Family Violence, Bodily Injury. The prosecution dismissed the case after presentations, and clarifications of fact by the alleged victim.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Tarrant County, Texas, re HG. Client was indicted for Robbery \/ Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity, based on alleged participation with persons who robbed cell phone stores.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re CH. Client was indicted for Possession of a Controlled Substance, after illegal substances were found in an abandoned car. The prosecution attempted to connect my client with the car, which belonged to a relative. After defense evidence, the State dismissed.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"federal-defense identity-passport theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Significant Charge Dismissed<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division, re DA. Per agreement, the U.S. Attorney's Office dismissed an indicted charge of Aggravated Identity Theft, which would have doubled the client's sentence.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re CH. From presentations to the District Attorney's Office, Client's Controlled Substance charge was dismissed.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2023\" data-areas=\"identity-passport theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2023<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 Collin County, Texas, re CH. Client was indicted for Fraudulent Use or Possession of Identifying Information. After presenting favorable evidence for the client showing that he did not know that the identifying information was in his presence, the District Attorney's Office dismissed.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar theft-fraud-property civil-regulatory government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Enforcement Action \/ Suit<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Fair Housing Act violations and potential related charges, re GL. U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney's Office, and HUD's Office of Inspector General investigated client for potential criminal and civil enforcement action regarding allegations of discriminatory housing practices, misuse of federal funds, misuse of identities, and theft. After presentations to the U.S. Attorney's Office and the investigating agents, criminal charges were declined. Also, the U.S. Attorney's Office and the Department of Justice declined to pursue a civil enforcement action against the owner of the apartment complex for such allegations.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar theft-fraud-property civil-regulatory government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Fair Housing Act violations and potential related charges, re GL. U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney's Office, and HUD's Office of Inspector General investigated client for potential criminal offenses regarding allegations of discriminatory housing practices, misuse of federal funds, misuse of identities, and theft. After presentations to the U.S. Attorney's Office and the investigating agents, there were no charges sought against client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense immigration-smuggling\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Home Confinement Instead of Prison Time in Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, Immigration Smuggling, re JDC. The U.S. Attorney's Office charged the client with Conspiracy to Transport Aliens in violation of federal criminal laws. The client was facing prison time per the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines calculations after he pled guilty instead of proceeding to trial. At sentencing, the defense made presentations and arguments for the court to order a non-custody sentence. The judge ordered home confinement for six months, although the client was facing approximately two (2) years incarceration.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property human-services-benefits government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Theft of Government Property and\/or Conspiracy to Commit Fraud, re FH \/ BH. Clients were under investigation for negotiating and using monies from the Social Security Administration, with allegations that the clients knew that they were not entitled to the monies. After discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office, the government did not proceed on any potential charges.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">State of Texas, Dallas County, Allegations of Theft and Embezzlement, re DP. The Dallas County District Attorney's Office did not proceed on allegations given to the local police that the client had stolen monies from the complainant's company and had also embezzled from company accounts.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"identity-passport theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissed Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">State of Texas, Dallas County, Allegations of Fraudulent Use or Possession of Identifying Information, re JR. The case allegations were that the client used or possessed personal, identity information of a person in Dallas County, but the Indictment alleged use elsewhere. The District Attorney's Office outright dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissed Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">State of Texas, Coryell County, Possession of Controlled Substance, 4 \u2013 200 Grams, re MG. Client was charged with possessing an illegal drug from allegations that occurred during a traffic stop. The District Attorney outright dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissed Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">State of Texas, Bell County, Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle, re MSG. Client was alleged to have stolen or used a stolen car, but he actually borrowed it from someone who received it as stolen.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissed Charge<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">State of Texas, Bell County, DWI, re MSG. Client was alleged to have driven a vehicle while under the influence of substances.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense immigration-smuggling\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Federal Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Western District of Texas \u2013 Client was stopped in a vehicle near the U.S. \/ Mexico border carrying illegal aliens, and he was arrested. The U.S. Border Patrol and other involved agencies eventually referred the matter to the local District Attorney's Office, and not the U.S. Attorney's Office for federal prosecution.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Sentence Below U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Recommendation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">\u2013 federal court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Investor Fraud Case, re SG. Client was indicted for Conspiracy and Wire Fraud in an investment fraud case, and at sentencing, client faced a recommended sentence of 78 -97 months from the Sentencing Guidelines calculations. After presentations to the court at the sentencing hearing, the U.S. District Judge varied downward to a sentence of twenty-four (24) months.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2022\" data-areas=\"federal-defense health-care-fraud\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Federal Case Offer Below Sentencing Guidelines Calculations<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2022<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Health Care Fraud, re IJ. Client was indicted for Health Care Fraud, False Statements Relating to Health Care, and Conspiracy, based on allegations of false billing and fictitious records to support the billing. The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines calculations for the millions of dollars in losses was a recommendation of about 20 years incarceration, or more, depending on how the calculations applied. After presentations and negotiations, the U.S. Attorney offered an agreement for several years lower than the Guidelines calculations.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Theft \u2013 $100,000 +, Dallas County, Texas, re TB. Client was charged with fraudulently representing that he replaced a company's computer system, when he supposedly did not use new computers and did not replace others. After many discussions and challenges to the state's evidence, the District Attorney's Office outright dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Revocation of Conditions of Release<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re PH \u2013 Government's Motion to Revoke Conditions of Release. The U.S. Attorney's Office alleged that Client was soliciting the sales of securities in violation of his conditions of release. Prior to the hearing, filed exhibits showing the allegations were not true. The U.S. Attorney's Office withdrew its motion to revoke.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Theft, Kaufman County, Texas, re JD. Client was charged with fraudulently obtaining monies for services to be rendered. After conducting our own investigation and making various presentations to the District Attorney's Office, the District Attorney outright dismissed this theft case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"white-collar government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Criminal Deceptive Trade Practices, Kaufman County, Texas, re JD. Client was charged with making false representations to a customer concerning his grant writing business. After various factual presentations to the District Attorney showing the flawed state's investigation, and legal arguments about the Indictment, the District Attorney outright dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"firearms-weapons assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon \/ Deadly Conduct, Dallas County, Texas, re DM. Client was charged with felony aggravated assault as another driver on the highway claimed that client needlessly pointed a handgun at him. After presentations to the District Attorney's Office about self-defense and facts about the claim, the District Attorney's Office abandoned the felony charge, and chose to proceed on the misdemeanor Deadly Conduct. After continued presentations, the District Attorney's Office dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Case Declined \/ No Charge<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Possession of Controlled Substance, Moore County, Texas, re JM. After the client's incident, made continued presentations to the prosecution about the incident, the client, and positive attributes of client. Prosecution declined to seek formal charges.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Theft \u2013 $30,000 \u2013 $150,000, Johnson County, Texas, re TR. Client was fired from his job as manager of a company that reported he had stolen equipment and monies by use of a company credit card. After showing the District Attorney that purchases were legitimate, after and showing the District Attorney that equipment off company premises was used for work, the District Attorney agreed to dismiss the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Less Than Recommended Guidelines Sentence on a Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Securities Fraud, re PH. Client was potentially facing approximately 210 \u2013 262 months imprisonment as a sentence recommendation pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. Client's sentence was capped at sixty (60) months in the plea agreement negotiated with the U.S. Attorney's Office.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar theft-fraud-property civil-regulatory government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Fair Housing Act violations and potential related charges, re GL. U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney's Office, and HUD's Office of Inspector General investigated client for potential criminal and civil enforcement action regarding allegations of discriminatory housing practices, misuse of federal funds, misuse of identities, and theft. After presentations to the U.S. Attorney's Office and the investigating agents, there were no charges sought against client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar identity-passport drug-offenses government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Passport Fraud, Wire Fraud, and Trafficking in False Passports, re OO. Client was under investigation for illegal creation and sale of passports that were counterfeited with the use of a computer. After presenting information about the client and the information on his computer, no charges were pursued.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">District of Columbia, PPP Fraud, re CR. Client was under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice for providing false information about a company in order to obtain a federal PPP loan. Client allegedly provided false information about employees and company sales numbers in order to increase the amount of the loan. The government did not pursue an Indictment, especially after the defense informed the Department of Justice of client's company information.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense tax-crimes human-services-benefits government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, re DM. U.S. Treasury investigated client for allegations of creating False Tax Returns and Misuse of Social Security Numbers. After presentations showing that the client had various tenants in rental properties, and that tenants were real persons, the government stopped the investigation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense money-laundering government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Eastern District of Texas, Texarkana Division, re CL. Client was under investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI for allegations of Money Laundering based upon deposits into his account. The allegations were that the monies were from fraudulent sources, and that the client was a "money mule," transmitting illegal monies for another person to conceal the identities and source of the monies. After presentations showing the true origins of the monies \/ deposits, the government stopped the investigation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property human-services-benefits government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re BH. Client was under investigation for Theft of Government Property and Social Security Fraud, based on allegations that client kept Social Security benefits of a deceased relative that continued after the relative's death. The U.S. Attorney's Office did not pursue an Indictment after presentations by the defense showing no intent to commit a crime.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"identity-passport theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Forgery \/ Embezzlement, Deaf Smith County \/ Taylor County, TX, re CM. Client was alleged to have illegally taken monies from a relative's bank account on different occasions. Defense presented evidence that Client had authority to do so.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense tax-crimes\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Less Than Recommended Guidelines Sentence on a Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division, False Tax Returns, re PR. Client operated a tax preparation business and was potentially facing approximately 46 \u2013 51 months imprisonment as a sentence recommendation pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. Client's sentence was capped at thirty (36) months pursuant to the plea agreement negotiated with the U.S. Attorney's Office.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"federal-defense firearms-weapons\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Cap of Sentence in a Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Western District of Texas, Midland Division, Felon in Possession of Firearms, re RT. The court indicated that it would depart upwardly from the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines to a ten (10) years sentence due to other, relevant conduct by the client that related to the firearms charge. Defense initiated a proposed agreement prior to sentencing for a specific sentence, being five (5) years, to which the U.S. Attorney agreed. The client was then capped at the five years sentence, which the court accepted.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2021\" data-areas=\"identity-passport immigration-smuggling\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Global Entry Approved<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2021<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Re MM. Client was denied an application for entry into the Global Entry program, which allows expedited entry through Customs when traveling abroad and returning to the United States. Assisted the client with new, additional information for seeking this passport-enhancing program, and client was approved for Global Entry, making his international travel at the airport quicker and more efficient.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses assault-violent contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissals<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Assault \u2013 Collin County, Texas, re MD. Numerous discussions and presentations to the Collin County District Attorney's Office resulted in the DA's Office dismissal. Case B. Possession of a Controlled Substance, Nolan County, Texas, re AT. After discussions with the District Attorney's Office, the charge was eventually dismissed. Case C. Falsifying a Drug Test, Parker County, Texas, re AC. Client was alleged to have influenced or attempted to influence a drug test related to conditions of release. Case was outright dismissed after discussions with the prosecution.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"identity-passport drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Charges Declined<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Marijuana Possession, Dallas County, Texas, re JJ. Client was arrested after an incident was reported, and information was given to the police department and District Attorney afterward, resulting in the declination of the charge. Case B. Possession or Use of Identifying Information of Another Person, Tarrant County, Texas, re MM. Client was arrested regarding information of a relative that he possessed. After presentations to the District Attorney showing that the Client did not use the information to attempt to access an account or obtain a loan, this felony charge was declined. Case C. Possessions of Controlled Substances, Rockwall County, Texas, re JB. Client was arrested for possessing various substances, and the District Attorney's Office declined charges for Lidocaine, Xylocaine, and THC after presentations to the DA showing the substances were not Client's.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"cps-family government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Investigations Closed<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. CPS Investigation, Tarrant County, Texas re SM. Investigation regarding with children at home closed with no action after discussions with, and information given to, the investigator. Case B. CPS Investigation, Tarrant County, Texas re SM. Another investigation regarding belief that child was at risk was closed with no action after discussions with the investigator.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar tax-crimes identity-passport money-laundering forfeiture-seizures government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Prosecution<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Federal Investigation re Passport Fraud and Money Laundering, re MO. Agents detained client at the airport and seized computers and other items from the home. After presentations of information, the case was declined for prosecution. Case B. Federal Investigation re Assisting in Fraudulent Tax Returns and False Statements to the Government, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re CM. Agents investigated Client based on various persons using the same address for tax filings and related documents. After showing agents the reasons why persons utilized the address, and that the other persons were real persons, and not fictitious, the U.S. Attorney's Office declined prosecution. Case C. Investigation re Allegations of Embezzled Monies and Bank Fraud, Northern District of Texas, re BM. Investigation was prompted by allegations that Client had taken monies from an employer account for non-business uses. Contacts with employer and bank investigator resulted in no charges pursued.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Lower Sentence in Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re MG \u2013 Conspiracy case. Client originally faced a mandatory minimum of ten (10) years per the Indictment, but negotiated an agreement removing the mandatory minimum. Additionally, Client's U.S. Sentencing Guidelines recommendation for prison was 168 \u2013 210 months, and after the sentencing hearing, the court sentencing Client to 108 months.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property contempt-probation human-services-benefits\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Probation in Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Western District of Texas, Waco Division, re JP \u2013 Conspiracy to Defraud the Government, and Theft of Government Property. Client was part of a scheme that provided false invoices to, and payment from, the VA. The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines recommended imprisonment for Client, as in the vast majority of federal cases, but after a sentencing hearing with motions and evidence, the court sentenced Client to probation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Theft and Credit Card Abuse, Dallas County, Texas, re AH. Client was charged with stealing \/ embezzling monies from previous employer via false invoices and using a company credit card for personal use. After numerous presentations of evidence and potential witnesses' statements, the DA dismissed the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"forfeiture-seizures\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Return of Client's Diverted Wire Transfer<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Return of Client's Diverted Wire Transfer \u2013 re MW. Client wire transferred over $200,000 as a purchase payment, but the wire transfer was fraudulently diverted to an account at a different bank. It appears that hackers inserted fraudulent wire transfer instructions to accomplish the diversion of monies. Assisted Client in getting 95% of the monies returned.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"federal-defense drug-offenses firearms-weapons\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Variance Downward from Sentence in Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re EJ \u2013 Felon in Possession of Firearm case. The case evidence included connections to illegal drugs and trafficking. After a sentencing hearing, the court sentenced Client to lower than the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines recommended for imprisonment, as the court granted our motion to vary downward from the sentencing range.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"federal-defense contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Revocation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Potential Revocation of Federal Supervised Release, Eastern District of Texas, re TB. Client was in violation of conditions of supervised release on the federal case, and the U.S. Probation Office threatened to revoke Client's supervised release, which would have sent him back to federal prison. After meetings and discussions with U.S. Probation, the probation officer and supervisor agreed to not pursue a revocation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"federal-defense forfeiture-seizures\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Forfeiture \/ Return of Property<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Potential Forfeiture of Seized Monies and Jewelry, Northern District of Texas, re CV. A significant sum of monies was seized along with jewelry in a related federal criminal case. Although the U.S. Attorney considered seeking a forfeiture of the monies and jewelry, after various presentations showing the source of the monies and items, the decision was no forfeiture. Case B. Potential Forfeiture of Seized Monies, Dallas County, Texas, re KB. Several thousand dollars of monies were seized, allegedly related to criminal activity. The District Attorney's Office filed a forfeiture action against the monies seeking a forfeiture, but after various discussions, the District Attorney's Office dismissed the action and returned the monies.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2020\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Correction of Judgment in Criminal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2020<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Dallas County, Texas, re KS. Client was sentenced to state imprisonment time, and after a passage of time, client was still not released. Found one of Client's judgments issued with a mistake, filed a motion and had discussions with Texas Department of Corrections, the District Attorney, and the court. The court changed the judgment, which released Client from custody.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"firearms-weapons assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Felony Reduced to Misdemeanor<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Aggravated Assault with Deadly Weapon Allegation\u2013 Dallas County, Texas, re DM. Presentations to the Dallas County District Attorney's Office convinced the DA's Office that there was no evidence to support the felony allegation of Aggravated Assault. The District Attorney has proceeded with a reduced misdemeanor charge to dispose of the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"firearms-weapons school-juvenile\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Disciplinary Action<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Potential Weapon Charge and School Disciplinary Action, School District in North Texas, re AO. School officials temporarily suspended high school student for having razor blades in his possession at a school function. Possessing razor blades, among other items, are prohibited by school policy, and the school was posed to send student to an alternate school for those who are problem students. Additionally, there was the possibility of a criminal referral for criminal prosecution of Weapon in a Prohibited Place, or a similar charge. Case B. During discussions prior the scheduled hearing on the disciplinary matter, including discussions with the school district's attorney, the school agreed that an alternate school was too harsh for the alleged violation. Also, the school dismissed the allegation and the student returned to class as normal. Case C. Potential School Expulsion Action, School in Williamson County, Texas, re AT. School officials temporarily suspended high school student regarding an allegation of distributing prescription drugs at school. After a disciplinary hearing at school, student \/ client was not expelled, and was given credit for the alternate school days already attended.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses firearms-weapons\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Charges Declined<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Unlawful Carrying of a Weapon, Collin County, Texas, re CH. The client was arrested for a handgun in his car, with the weapon charge submitted to the Collin County District Attorney's Office for prosecution. After continued contacts and submissions to the District Attorney's Office, the District Attorney declined the case, that is, declined to proceed with prosecution. Case B. Distribution of Prescription Medication, Williamson County, Texas, re AT. Made presentations and discussions with the State regarding giving prescription medication to another or other person. The State agreed that it could not prove the alleged charge.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"federal-defense immigration-smuggling\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">S Visa Recommendation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern District of Texas, re RM. Negotiated that the U.S. Attorney's Office and Immigration and Customs Enforcement Detention would agree to recommend an "S Visa" for client. The S Visa assists client in his status as a resident.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"federal-defense injunctions-business\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Multi-Million Dollar Judgment Upheld<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Moss v. Princip, etal., Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. Assisted on the plaintiff's brief to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding this case of contract damages, past royalties due, and tort damages, concerning an investment in a video games channel. Plaintiff's significant judgment was upheld.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Charge Dismissed<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Failure to ID, Kaufman County, Texas, re MS. Charge was based upon contact with law enforcement regarding a call from the client's ex-husband. Charge was outright dismissed.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"immigration-smuggling forfeiture-seizures\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Forfeiture Action<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Seizure of Cash, Dallas\/Fort Worth International Airport, re LP. U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agents detained client and seized $18,000.00 in cash. Presented our position to Customs\/Homeland Security that the agents had no cause to detain client, and no evidence to show the monies were from illegal sources. Homeland Security thereafter decided to release the monies and not proceed with a forfeiture action. Case B. Seizure of Cash, Dallas, TX, re CV. Cash was seized from client's residence during a search of the house by law enforcement. Although the cash was seized during the search, there was no forfeiture by the District Attorney's Office after presentations by the defense.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"assault-violent prostitution-solicitation cps-family\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Grand Jury No Bill (Refusal to Indict)<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Sexual Assault of Child, Tarrant County, Texas, re EP. Client was accused of assaulting a teen female. Presented inconsistencies in the allegation to the District Attorney's Office, history of the alleged victim, and a truthful polygraph result. Had discussions with the District Attorney's Office about how this did alleged incident did not occur, and made these presentations to the grand jury, who declined to charge the client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges Referred for Prosecution<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Insurance Fraud Investigation, Collin County, Texas, re CS. Client was alleged to have made fraudulent claims for new roofs and payments, concerning damage to residence at different times. After discussing information with the investigator about other facts and evidence, the investigator closed the matter without referring charges to the U.S. Attorney or District Attorney.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"theft-fraud-property forfeiture-seizures\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Seized Money Returned \/ No Forfeiture<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Alleged participation in Conspiracy to Sell Stolen Cell Phones, Dallas County, Texas, re KB. Cash was seized from client during a search, but eventually returned as District Attorney agreed with presentations that evidence did not justify forfeiture.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Prosecution<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Embezzlement \/ Misapplication of Fiduciary Property, Northern District of Texas \/ Dallas County, TX, re BM. Client was accused of taking monies from employer accounts and converting for personal use. After discussions and presentations, no charges were sought. Case B. Securities Fraud, Northern District of Texas, re PG. Allegations against the client included sales of unregistered securities, fraud in the sale of securities, and misapplication of funds.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"firearms-weapons assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Grand Jury No-Bill \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon, Dallas County, TX, re DH. Client was accused of pointing a weapon at a person and making threats. Defense presentations to DA and grand jury panel resulted in grand jury refusing to formally charge client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"federal-defense health-care-fraud\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Conspiracy to Commit Health Care Fraud, Northern District of Texas, re AB. Client was targeted as a potential defendant regarding a health care fraud case, as he made referrals to certain doctors for a fee. Presentations to the U.S. Attorney's Office showed that the services client sold were only associated with these doctors.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2019\" data-areas=\"human-services-benefits government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2019<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Investigation, Texas Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General, Dallas\/Fort Worth, TX, re RC. After discussions and submissions of information, the Texas HHS investigator closed the matter without action.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Felony Reduced to Class C Misdemeanor, re SH<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Possession of Controlled Substance\u2013 Dallas County, Texas. Presentations to the Dallas County District Attorney's Office, including supervisors, resulted in the Client's felony charge being reduced to a Class C Misdemeanor charge to dispose of the case.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar tax-crimes money-laundering\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Six (6) Months Only on a Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Southern District of New York, Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, and Money Laundering re RM. Federal Indictment in New York for a value-added tax scheme of over $20 million, alleged to have occurred from Mexico and Texas, to and through New York City. Per negotiation, obtained concessions on a plea agreement, then without cooperation with the United States, and after filing a sentencing memorandum, made arguments to the court at the sentencing hearing. The court varied downwardly from the recommended imprisonment range on the federal Sentencing Guidelines calculations, sentencing the client to only six (6) months imprisonment.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar health-care-fraud tax-crimes identity-passport assault-violent theft-fraud-property government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Indictment \/ No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division (Plano) Federal investigation for allegations of Conspiracy, Wire Fraud, and Identity Theft, re ST. Federal investigation into allegations that the client and others transferred and used monies received from a federal tax return scheme to benefit themselves and others. Case B. U.S. Department of Justice \/ U. S. State Department, Altering a Passport, re MM. Detention of client overseas when client was traveling, after client submitted the passport to the U.S. Embassy. Case C. Dallas County, Texas, Theft or Embezzlement, re AH. Client was alleged to have converted company materials by selling them for his benefit. Case D. Collin County, Texas, Assault by Threats, re JL. Client was alleged to have used social media to have posted a threat against another person. Case E. Northern District of Texas re KB. Health Care Fraud allegation. Client was investigated for allegations concerning about billing for services not rendered and overbilling. Case F. Cooke County, TX re BK. State grand jury investigation into alleged securities fraud.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Felony Dismissed<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Dallas County, Texas, re NB. Case dismissed after presentations to the District Attorney's Office.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"firearms-weapons assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Grand Jury No-Bill (Refusal to Indict)<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Dallas County, Texas, two cases of Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon, re DH. Client was arrested for allegedly pointing a handgun at two persons after an argument between them. After presenting statements, photos, and other evidence in client's favor, the grand jury refused to formally charge (indict) client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"assault-violent prostitution-solicitation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Allegation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Dallas County, Texas, Sexual Assault, re BF. Allegations were to be made against client regarding sexual assault and related conduct. After investigating for client, and making client's position known, there was no complainant proceeding with allegations.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"federal-defense government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Action<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Potential Defendant in Fraud Suit, re JH. U.S. Department of Justice investigated alleged fraud about representations concerning wind power investments. After presentations and discussions, client was not named in a suit.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar theft-fraud-property government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges \/ No Criminal Referral<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, Securities Fraud and Misappropriation of Monies, re PG. Client was under investigation from investments into technology applications to the oil and gas industry, and defense information contained evidence of defendant's real efforts.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Contempt<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">No contempt \u2013 re MP, Texas client, Florida court. A court ordered client to provide information that appeared to be beyond the scope of his Florida proceeding, and that conflicted with federal law. Eventually, the court withdrew the contempt order.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"federal-defense contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Less Than Recommended Guidelines Sentence on a Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Southern District of Texas, Revocation of Supervised Release re BA. Federal motion to revoke Client's Supervised Release after incarceration on the original federal case based on a new State of Texas Indictment. Client was facing 30 months or more pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines calculations as a sentence recommendation. After presentations of evidence to the court at the revocation hearing regarding positive factors, the court sentenced client to eighteen (18) months incarceration.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Two Year Sentence When Client Faced 25<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Two Year Sentence When Client Faced 25 \u2013 Life, re RW \u2013 Possession of Controlled Substance\u2013 Kaufman County, Texas. Presentations to the Dallas County District Attorney's Office about issues with the State's case against client plus positive information about the client, resulted in an offer of two (2) years rather than the 25 \u2013 life he faced on the charge based on his criminal history.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"assault-violent prostitution-solicitation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Assault by Contact Dismissed<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Assault by Contact Dismissed, re CS \u2013 Rockwall, Texas. Presentations to the prosecution about the allegation of wrongful touching of a sexual nature, resulted in a dismissal.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2018\" data-areas=\"human-services-benefits\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Criminal Referral or Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2018<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">No Criminal Referral or Case \u2013 Austin, Texas. Client had allegedly applied for and received unemployment benefits while being employed and receiving income through the Texas Workforce Commission.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar health-care-fraud money-laundering assault-violent government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges\/No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. No Charges\/No Indictment re Federal Investigation, re JT \u2013 Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering \u2013 Northern District of Texas. Presentations to the U.S. Attorney convinced the U.S. Attorney that the Client was not a part of group of persons who had knowledge of, or participated in, illegal activities that provided monies that were spent on real estate and other investments. Case B. No Charge \/ No Indictment \u2013 Conspiracy and Health Care Fraud \u2013 Northern District of Texas, re RM. Case C. Dallas County, TX or federal Northern District of Texas, re RM. Health Care Fraud investigation, allegations of conspiracy to defraud by changing and manipulating billing codes at clinics. Case D. Dallas County, TX re RW. Allegations of felony Assault. Case E. Cooke County, TX re SM. Allegations of Securities Fraud and Sale of Unregistered Securities. Case F. Cooke County, TX re PA. Allegations of Sales of Unregistered Securities and related potential charges. Case G. Northern District of Texas re KB. Health Care Fraud investigation. Case H. Northern District of Texas re TB. Health Care Fraud investigation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses firearms-weapons theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Tarrant County, TX, Obstruction of Justice; Unlawful Carrying a Weapon (Firearm), re TS. Per negotiation, obtained a dismissal of the charges. Case B. Dallas County, TX. Felony Possession of a Controlled Substance, re GG. Persuaded the District Attorney to dismiss the charge upon showing that another person placed a controlled substance in client's bag. Case C. Dallas County, TX. Theft, re LS. The State agreed to dismiss the Indictment for theft regarding a Hummer vehicle that was the subject property. Case D. Dallas County, TX re JC. Misappropriation of Fiduciary Funds. Client was indicted for allegedly taking an economic advantage of an elderly person for whom he provided care. Case E. Dallas County, TX re KC. Abuse of Elderly (Economic). Client was indicted for abusing an elderly person for whom care was given.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charge\/Declined Charge<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Hood County, TX. Possession of a Controlled Substance, re SP. Persuaded the District Attorney to decline the charge upon showing that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"assault-violent theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Declined Charge<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Dallas County, TX. Assault \u2013 Bodily Injury, re SM. Presentations to the District Attorney of photos and statements showed that the complainant had a history of physical abuse with the alleged defendant. Case B. Dallas County, TX re AE. After presentations to the District Attorney's Office about destruction of property allegations, and potential coercion or extortion of client, the District Attorney's Office declined to proceed with any prosecution.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"federal-defense white-collar theft-fraud-property contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Probation on Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Eastern District of Texas, re RT. Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud, regarding allegations that client participated in a scheme to obtain and sell stolen cell phones and screens. Although a calculation of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range yielded a recommendation of several years imprisonment, the negotiations yielded an agreed sentence of probation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal of Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Eastern District of Texas, re RT. Indictment was dismissed that charged Conspiracy regarding stolen property and sales, allegations that client participated in a conspiracy to sell stolen cell phones.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"white-collar\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Suit or Enforcement Action<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">U.S. Securities Exchange Commission \u2013 New York City, NY, re TK. After allegations of improper\/illegal revenue recognition by management of a large company that contracts with the United States government, as well as improper accounting controls, defense made several presentations of its own evidence to show that the client was not involved nor had any intent to commit any wrongdoing. The Securities and Exchange Commission decided to not take action against the client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Felony Reduced to Misdemeanor<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Felony Reduced to Misdemeanor \u2013 Dallas County, TX, re NB. Included non-reporting, as opposed to the standard reporting to a probation officer.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"federal-defense contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Misdemeanor Reduction \/ Probation on Federal Case<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Northern District of Texas, re SA. Conspiracy case, wherein the client was originally listed as one of the top persons in the conspiracy. After presentations of items of evidence of which the government was not aware, and explanations of the conversations captured on telephone calls, the U.S. Attorney agreed to a misdemeanor.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Violation of Probation<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Collin County, TX re AE. After presentations of evidence to the District Attorney's Office that revealed their information was incorrect about violations of probation, that office declined to take action on the violation allegations.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2017\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Allegations of Abuse of Elderly People<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2017<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Dallas County, TX re PF. Allegations of Abuse of Elderly Person. Discussions with police department regarding lack of evidence and bias of complainants, lead to no charges against the client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2016\" data-areas=\"federal-defense drug-offenses forfeiture-seizures government-investigations\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges\/No Prosecution<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2016<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Federal investigation of synthetic drug trafficking, and no forfeiture, Northern District of Texas, re JY. Client was under investigation for trafficking in synthetic controlled substances, mainly spice. Client stood to loose a very large amount of money in accounts that could be attributed to proceeds of the trafficking, yet the U.S. Attorney agreed not to forfeit the funds.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2016\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses firearms-weapons assault-violent\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Dismissal<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2016<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Possession of controlled substance (cocaine), State of Texas, Dallas County, re GG. Case B. Possession of controlled substance, State of Texas, Dallas County, re TS. Case C. Possession of controlled substance, and unlawful carrying of a weapon, State of Texas, Dallas County, re KB. Case D. Obstructing an Officer, State of Oklahoma, Canadian County, re PL. Client was charged with obstructing a law enforcement officer when he refused to submit to a request for a dna sample. Case E. Assault\u2013domestic violence, State of Texas, Collin County, re KT. Client was alleged to have assaulted a girlfriend, yet from presentations of affidavits and photographs, the District Attorney's Office dismissed against client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2016\" data-areas=\"federal-defense\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges\/No Indictment<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2016<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Criminal copyright conspiracy, Eastern District of Texas, re AV. Client was alleged to have been a part of "bootlegging" videos and music videos for sale. Case B. Possession of controlled substances, State of Texas, Denton County, re MN. Client was arrested for felony possession of controlled substances. Case C. Felony evading detention or arrest, State of Texas, Dallas County, re JC. Client was arrested for evading detention or arrest in a traffic situation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2016\" data-areas=\"drug-offenses\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Charges<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2016<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Possession of controlled substance, cyclobenzaprine, State of Texas, dallas county, re JR. Client was arrested for possession of the substance, yet after proving that the client had a legitimate prescription for that time period, the District Attorney agreed not to charge the client.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2016\" data-areas=\"federal-defense immigration-smuggling contempt-probation\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Probation in Federal Court<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2016<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Conspiracy to commit visa fraud, Northern District of Texas, re RM. Client was alleged to have participated in an H1b visa scheme to entice foreign workers to come to the United States by promising jobs that did not exist. After presentations prior to the sentencing hearing, and argument at sentencing, client was sentenced to probation.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2016\" data-areas=\"federal-defense tax-crimes identity-passport\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">Less Time than Sentencing Guidelines<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2016<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Case A. Criminal tax case, Conspiracy to File False Tax Returns, Middle District of Tennessee, re JC. Client was indicted in federal court in Nashville, Tennessee for criminal tax charges based upon his tax preparation business activities. Client was sentenced to the much lower sentence of eighteen (18) months. Case B. False Statement to Obtain Passport, Middle District of Florida, re MAH. Client had used a false name and incorrect information to obtain a United States passport. Case C. False Statement to Obtain Passport, Middle District of Florida, re MRT. Client falsely used another person's name and information to obtain a United States passport.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n\n <article class=\"case-card\" data-year=\"2016\" data-areas=\"federal-defense theft-fraud-property\">\n <h3 class=\"case-title\">No Criminal Referral<\/h3>\n <div class=\"case-year\">2016<\/div>\n <p class=\"case-desc\">Misappropriation of Fiduciary Funds, Theft, and\/or Fraud, Travis County, TX or federal Western District of Texas, re LT. Settled with the victim company regarding unauthorized use of email lists, domain names, sales of product going forward, and related matters, which resulted in sales of products similar to the victim company.<\/p>\n <\/article>\n <\/div>\n\n <div class=\"no-results\" id=\"no-results\" style=\"display:none;\">\n No cases match your current filters. Try selecting a different Practice Area or Year.\n <\/div>\n <\/main>\n\n<\/div>\n\n<script>\n(function () {\n var state = { area: 'all', year: 'all' };\n var cards = document.querySelectorAll('.case-card');\n var areaBtns = document.querySelectorAll('[data-area]');\n var yearBtns = document.querySelectorAll('[data-year]');\n var titleEl = document.getElementById('results-title');\n var countEl = document.getElementById('results-count');\n var noResultsEl = document.getElementById('no-results');\n\n var areaLabels = {\n \"federal-defense\": \"Federal Criminal Defense\",\"white-collar\": \"White Collar and Financial Crimes\",\"health-care-fraud\": \"Health Care Fraud\",\"tax-crimes\": \"Tax Crimes & IRS Investigations\",\"identity-passport\": \"Identity, Passport, & Information Offenses\",\"money-laundering\": \"Money Laundering\",\"drug-offenses\": \"Drug Offenses & Controlled Substances\",\"immigration-smuggling\": \"Immigration & Human Smuggling\",\"firearms-weapons\": \"Firearms & Weapons\",\"assault-violent\": \"Assault, Violent Offenses, & Related\",\"prostitution-solicitation\": \"Prostitution or Solicitation\",\"theft-fraud-property\": \"Theft, Fraud & Property Crimes\",\"school-juvenile\": \"School, Juvenile, & Education-Related Matters\",\"cps-family\": \"CPS & Family-Related Investigations\",\"forfeiture-seizures\": \"Forfeiture, Seizures, and Return of Property\",\"civil-regulatory\": \"Civil and Regulatory Investigations\",\"injunctions-business\": \"Injunctions and Business Torts\",\"contempt-probation\": \"Contempt, Probation, Supervision, Release Conditions\",\"human-services-benefits\": \"Human Services & Benefits\",\"government-investigations\": \"Government Investigations\"\n };\n\n function setActive(nodelist, key, value) {\n nodelist.forEach(function (b) {\n b.classList.toggle('active', b.getAttribute('data-' + key) === value);\n });\n }\n\n function updateResultsHeader(visibleCount) {\n var areaLabel = state.area === 'all' ? 'All Practice Areas' : (areaLabels[state.area] || state.area);\n var yearLabel = state.year === 'all' ? '' : ' \u00b7 ' + state.year;\n titleEl.textContent = areaLabel + yearLabel;\n countEl.textContent = visibleCount + (visibleCount === 1 ? ' case' : ' cases') + ' shown';\n }\n\n function applyFilters() {\n var visible = 0;\n cards.forEach(function (card) {\n var cardYear = card.getAttribute('data-year');\n var cardAreas = (card.getAttribute('data-areas') || '').split(' ');\n var areaMatch = state.area === 'all' || cardAreas.indexOf(state.area) !== -1;\n var yearMatch = state.year === 'all' || cardYear === state.year;\n var show = areaMatch && yearMatch;\n card.style.display = show ? '' : 'none';\n if (show) visible++;\n });\n noResultsEl.style.display = visible === 0 ? 'block' : 'none';\n updateResultsHeader(visible);\n }\n\n areaBtns.forEach(function (b) {\n b.addEventListener('click', function () {\n state.area = b.getAttribute('data-area');\n setActive(areaBtns, 'area', state.area);\n applyFilters();\n });\n });\n yearBtns.forEach(function (b) {\n b.addEventListener('click', function () {\n state.year = b.getAttribute('data-year');\n setActive(yearBtns, 'year', state.year);\n applyFilters();\n });\n });\n\n \/\/ ====== JS-DRIVEN STICKY SIDEBAR ======\n \/\/ Fallback for host environments (WordPress themes, page builders) where an\n \/\/ ancestor has overflow:hidden or transform, which silently breaks native sticky.\n var sidebar = document.querySelector('.sidebar');\n var layout = document.querySelector('.case-layout');\n if (sidebar && layout) {\n var TOP_GAP = 20;\n var naturalLeft = 0;\n var naturalWidth = 0;\n var stickAt = 0;\n var ticking = false;\n\n function measure() {\n sidebar.classList.remove('is-pinned');\n sidebar.style.left = '';\n sidebar.style.width = '';\n sidebar.style.top = '';\n var r = sidebar.getBoundingClientRect();\n naturalLeft = r.left + window.scrollX;\n naturalWidth = r.width;\n stickAt = r.top + window.scrollY - TOP_GAP;\n }\n\n function updateSticky() {\n if (window.innerWidth < 900) {\n sidebar.classList.remove('is-pinned');\n sidebar.style.left = '';\n sidebar.style.width = '';\n sidebar.style.top = '';\n return;\n }\n var scrollY = window.scrollY;\n var layoutRect = layout.getBoundingClientRect();\n var layoutBottom = layoutRect.bottom + scrollY;\n var sidebarHeight = sidebar.offsetHeight;\n\n if (scrollY >= stickAt) {\n sidebar.classList.add('is-pinned');\n sidebar.style.left = naturalLeft + 'px';\n sidebar.style.width = naturalWidth + 'px';\n var maxTop = layoutBottom - sidebarHeight - scrollY;\n sidebar.style.top = Math.min(TOP_GAP, maxTop) + 'px';\n } else {\n sidebar.classList.remove('is-pinned');\n sidebar.style.left = '';\n sidebar.style.width = '';\n sidebar.style.top = '';\n }\n }\n\n function onScroll() {\n if (!ticking) {\n window.requestAnimationFrame(function () { updateSticky(); ticking = false; });\n ticking = true;\n }\n }\n\n function initSticky() { measure(); updateSticky(); }\n if (document.readyState === 'loading') {\n document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', initSticky);\n } else {\n initSticky();\n }\n window.addEventListener('load', initSticky);\n window.addEventListener('scroll', onScroll, { passive: true });\n window.addEventListener('resize', function () { measure(); updateSticky(); }, { passive: true });\n }\n})();\n<\/script>\n\n<\/body>\n<\/html>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Over 2,500+ Cases John Teakell Case Results: Proven Success in Dallas Federal Criminal Defense Federal Criminal Defense Case Results | John R. Teakell Proven Outcomes Across Federal & State Court Federal Criminal Defense Case Results Examples Each year, John R. Teakell handles hundreds of complex federal, white-collar, and state criminal cases. The results below represent …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"elementor_header_footer","meta":{"_angie_page":false,"_genesis_block_theme_hide_title":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3445","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","post","without-featured-image"],"featured_image_src":null,"featured_image_src_square":null,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3445"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3445\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/teakelllaw.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}