Case Results for our Fort Worth Criminal Law Firm

Client, a foreign national, was accused in federal court of international drug conspiracy to purchase over one million dollars of cocaine for international sale and distribution. Client was facing a potential life sentence. There were four total defendants actually charged in the conspiracy. Two plead guilty and testified for the Government against the other two that ultimately proceeded to trial. In fact, Client and his trial co-defendant were actually arrested together in possession of over a half a million dollars in cash. At trial one defendant was found guilty, while Mr. White’s client was found not guilty and immediately released. Despite the jury convicting the other defendant at the trial of the alleged conspiracy, Mr. White successfully convinced the jury that his Client had no knowledge of the illegal conspiracy and that he committed no acts in furtherance of the illegal conspiracy.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY

Client formally charged in federal multi-defendant methamphetamine conspiracy however; the Government was actively pursuing other related charges such as money laundering, witness intimidation, and/or kidnapping. It was alleged that that Client assisted in several large-scale drug transactions and was even present and assisted in the questioning of a government informant at gunpoint. Despite an overwhelming mountain of circumstantial evidence linking Client to these activities, Mr. White was able to successfully negotiate a dismissal of the pending methamphetamine conspiracy charge and an agreement from the Government not to pursue any additional threatened charges. Through aggressive pretrial investigation and negotiation Mr. White was able to assist the Client in avoiding the stress and expense of a Federal criminal trial.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED

Client was the last defendant formally charged in a multi- federal district multi-defendant methamphetamine conspiracy in which the investigation and prosecution of more that fifteen co-defendants spanned more than five years. Numerous co-defendants had already either plead guilty and/or had been found guilty prior to Client being formally charged. Despite the numerous previously convicted being ready willing and able to testify against Client, Mr. White was able to convince the prosecution that a conviction based primarily, if not solely, on the questionable testimony of others convicted in the same drug conspiracy would be very unlikely and patently unjust in this particular circumstance. Accordingly, on the eve of trial the case was dismissed and Client was not put in jeopardy of a minimum ten year prison sentence. Mr. White’s aggressive pretrial investigation and negotiation was again responsible for this successful disposition.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED

Client was contacted by the FBI because his internet account and e-mail address came up in a national sting operation investigating possession of child pornography. As a result of this investigation there were numerous indictments and convictions all around the country. Not surprisingly, much of the pornographic material was made available by law enforcement. While Client did initially view some of the prohibited pornographic materials via the internet, Mr. White was able to show that much of the remaining prohibited pornographic materials were unknowingly downloaded to Client’s computer via pop-ups and other malicious software. An independent team of computer experts retained by Mr. White aided in the development of the defense strategy. In the end a combination of a thorough pretrial investigation, an aggressive defense strategy, and skillful negotiation resulted in no formal charges ever being filed against Client.

RESULT: NO CHARGES FILED

Client, a previously convicted felon, was arrested with a handgun under the seat of the vehicle that he was driving. Under Texas law, it is a third degree felony for an individual who has been previously convicted of a felony offense to be I possession of a handgun. To further complicate the situation Client was arrested with two other young men who were in the process of attempting to pass forged payroll checks. Under Texas law possession is loosely defined as knowing care, custody and control of an object. Arguing that a person is not necessarily in legal possession of everything in a vehicle that they may happen to be operating, we were able to convince a trial jury that that there was some reasonable doubt as whether Client was actually in (possession) knowing, care, custody, and control of the handgun. This case was particularly challenging because the “common sense” reaction was that Client, was probably guilty. In situations like this it is important to have a lawyer who can 1) truly relate to ordinary people; 2) make a jury have some sympathy for the client no matter how bad they have previously been; and 3) make a jury believe and buy into the requirement of the principle of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt”. In essence, for a jury to return a verdict of not guilty they had to find both the Client and Mr. White more credible than the prosecution’s evidence.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY

Client, a former professional baseball player, was arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI) after admittedly consuming several alcoholic beverages. In Texas you will often hear the phrase “Drink, Drive, Go to Jail”. This is simply not the law. There are essentially two ways for the prosecution to prove the crime of DWI: 1) scientific proof of a blood alcohol content of 0.08 or higher; or 2) loss of the normal use of your mental and physical faculties. Client refused to submit to the breathalyzer test so the prosecution was forced to attempt to prove the latter. Whether a person has lost the normal use of their mental and physical faculties while operating a vehicle is essentially a basic factual dispute and this is where true trial lawyers shine. At the three day jury trial we meticulously: 1) created doubt concerning the arresting police officers accounts of their initial observations via skillful and aggressive cross examinations; 2) artfully demonstrated that Client was in fact in possession of his mental and physical faculties; and 3) put a defense-oriented spin on every point the prosecution attempted to establish in support of their position. To make things worse, Client failed to even show up for court on the final day of trial. Although the judge forced us to proceed in the Client’s absence, the appropriate seeds were already planted and then further entertainingly reinforced during closing argument.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY

Client, a simple working-class man, was accused of numerous instances of inappropriate sexual activity with his twelve year old daughter and was potentially facing a life sentence. Client and the child’s mother were never married but Client had always been active in the child’s life. Pretrial investigation revealed previous allegations of sexual abuse against other family members, independent promiscuous sexual activity on the part of the child, and severe discipline problems both at home and at school. Our trial strategy was essentially that the young girl was making these false allegations because she was a severely troubled youth with both mental and disciplinary problems who was angry because her father was the only disciplinarian in her life. Equipped with this information and despite both the child and her mother’s insistence in the veracity of the allegations, at trial we were able to show a jury that there was some reasonable doubt as to whether or not these allegations were true. This was done by thorough artful cross-examination and the development of genuine rapport and trust with the jury.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY

Client, a popular student at a local college, was charged with sexually assault (rape) of a young lady at a college party held in an affluent suburb. Client actually had sexual intercourse with the young lady but maintained that the sex was consensual. An interesting fact was that the young lady’s boyfriend was also at the party where the alleged rape occurred and the young lady was angry at the boyfriend because she felt that the boyfriend was flirting with other women. Both the Client and the young lady had too much alcohol to drink. Additionally, there were numerous witnesses to Client’s interaction with the young lady before the alleged rape and to the ultimate conclusion of the sexual intercourse. After realizing that the young lady was missing for several minutes her boyfriend began looking throughout the house for her. Boyfriend and two other friends ultimately hear Client and the young lady having intercourse in an upstairs bedroom and then kick the door open. Upon seeing her boyfriend the young lady immediately yells rape and Client is eventually arrested and charged. Prior to the case being presented to the grand jury for a probable cause determination, Client hires Mr. White who immediately has the key witnesses located and interviewed. The grand jury refused to find that there was probable cause to believe a crime was committed (no-billed the case) after Mr. White’s presentation of the newly discovered evidence despite the young lady’s continued persistence of the rape allegation. Early investigation and an aggressive defensive stance saved this Client from both lengthy and embarrassing court proceedings.

RESULT: CASE DISMISSED

To speak with a Fort Worth criminal lawyer about your case contact our law firm immediately.