Managing Partner
I recently argued a Motion for Early Termination of Pretrial Intervention and won! Our client was arrested for having a gun at an airport. Our client completely forgot he had the gun as he had just learned that a family member had passed away. In other words, the entire incident was truly a mistake. We submitted an application for pretrial intervention explaining that our client, a military man with zero criminal record, was focused on getting home to his family that day. The State reluctantly agreed to PTI, but asked for two years of supervision. Our client agreed, the Judge signed the order, and our client began supervision.
However, our client faced unique and idiosyncratic challenges as a result of not only his arrest, but also his continued participation in PTI. He’s a licensed professional and the body overseeing his profession has draconian rules related to arrests. Our client was becoming increasingly worried about his job and future job prospects as a result of his participation in PTI. After six months of supervision, we filed a motion asking the Court to end PTI. Despite phone calls and emails to the State asking their position on the motion, we never heard back. We filed our motion and the Court scheduled a hearing. The day before the hearing, the State filed an opposition to our motion. The State’s opposition was three-fold: (1) PTI was necessary for rehabilitation as well as specific and general deterrence; (2) our client agreed to twenty-four months of supervision, which was already lenient; and (3) our client did not indicate any actual harm or prejudice suffered.
The State wanted specifics, and so, after the Court allowed us time to reply, we provided the specifics. Our reply was multiple pages and contained numerous exhibits—letters, emails, and military records. The best exhibit was a letter from our client’s probation officer explaining, just five months into PTI, why our client absolutely did not need further supervision.
On the day of the hearing, the Judge asked if there were any additional arguments to be made, or if I wanted to rely on the papers, as the State did. I argued. I wholeheartedly believed that our client deserved early termination. I honestly could not fathom why the State was fighting so hard to keep our client under supervision. Not every client is deserving of leniency, but I knew I had to put every argument forward for this client, because I really believed he did deserve a break. So, I made my oral argument. I respectfully argued why I thought the Judge should sign the order. I explained all the unique ways our client was affected by supervision, including how it was affecting his ability to care for his family. I reiterated that our client was a military man with zero criminal history. The Judge remembered our client. He remembered the family emergency, and understood that, but for that dreadful information, our client would not have brought a gun to the airport. Justice prevailed when the Judge agreed to grant our motion and sign the order. It felt like a hard-earned but much deserved victory for our client.
*Prior results do not guarantee future outcomes *
