Call Now For Help

732.580.1237

New Jersey Lawyer Case Results

Case Results Disclaimer: These results are actual cases. More details are available from the firm. Each case is different. The facts, the law, the age of the involved person, the severity of the charge, the makeup of the jury, the rulings of the judge, are some of the factors that make each case different. The cases listed here are not a guarantee that if you have a similar case, you will get a similar case result Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case Name: State v. Z.L.

Facts: Client charged with assault and related criminal offenses by a private citizen, rather than the police. Client was also a government contractor and any conviction of any kind would have likely cost him his livelihood.

Result: The entire case was dismissed after our successful argument of pre-trial motions to dismiss the charges.

Case Name: State v. C.Q.

Facts: Client charged with possession of heroin, which could have carried a criminal conviction, jail, and a license suspension.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. J.G.

Facts: Client charged with assault after a mutual fight.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. S.N.

Facts: Client charged with shoplifting in Middlesex County.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. S.W.

Facts: Client charged with assault after a mutual fight erupted in a store.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. A.S.

Facts: Client accused of theft (car theft).

Result: Client maintained her innocence and we took the case to trial. We won the trial and the charges were dismissed.

Case Name: State v. M.T.

Facts: Client was suffering from a substance abuse problem and was charged with stealing from a family member. Once the police were involved, the case took on a life of its own despite the family not wanting the client to receive a criminal conviction.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. N.G.

Facts: Client charged with possession of a controlled dangerous substance in a motor vehicle, which carried a mandatory 2 year license suspension.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. V.G.

Facts: Client charged with issuing a bad check for a substantial amount of money.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. W.S.

Facts: Client charged with a variety of criminal offenses resulting from a property dispute in Bergen County. One of the charges was a felony. The case was eventually downgraded to municipal court.

Result: All charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. J.C.

Facts: Client was charged with aggravated assault after allegedly punching a law enforcement officer. This could have resulted in a criminal conviction and state prison.

Result: We were able to get the client enrolled in the pre-trial intervention program, which led to the case being dismissed.

Case Name: State v. A.R.

Facts: Client was the victim of identity theft. Another individual used our client’s identity after being charged with an offense in South Brunswick. The individual later pleaded guilty to the charge, resulting in a conviction being entered against him.

Result: We successfully petitioned the court to reopen the case through the filing of a post-conviction relief petition. After the issuing officer would not agree to the prosecutor dismissing the case (believing he had in fact charged the right person), we took the matter to trial and won. Case dismissed.

Case Name: State v. S.W.

Facts: Client was a graduate student in a prestigious program when he was charged with aggravated assault. This could have totally derailed his career.

Result: Charges dismissed without client having to enter a diversionary program.

Case Name: State v. E.B.

Facts: Client found asleep in his vehicle, which was lawfully parked, but with the engine running and with him in the driver’s seat. Client was admittedly intoxicated.

Result: DWI charge dismissed as prosecution could not prove the issue of “operation” beyond a reasonable doubt.

Case Name: State v. M.H.

Facts: Client involved in a minor accident on GSP. Client also suffered from some traits that made it appear as if he were intoxicated, and had taken prescription pills, which may have had an impact on his ability to safely drive a vehicle.

Result: DWI charge dismissed.

Case Name: State v. R.G.

Facts: Client stopped after police observed her car jump the curb. Later failed sobriety tests and was arrested for DWI. High blood alcohol content would have resulted in a minimum 7 month license suspension.

Result: We ascertained that the police officer who processed our client failed to adhere to what is known as the 20-minute observation period. This resulted in suspension of 90 days rather than 7-12 months.

Case Name: State v. J.L.

Facts: Client pulled over for speeding. After failing roadside sobriety tests, she was arrested for DWI. Breath testing resulted in a high BAC which would have mandated a minimum 7 month license suspension.

Result: Through our identification of a procedural oversight by the arresting officers, the breath reading was successfully suppressed. This resulted in client losing license for only 90 days on the DWI and all remaining charges dismissed.

Case Name: State v. S.L.

Facts: Client pulled over late at night for swerving. After failing sobriety tests, client submitted to Alcotest breath sampling.

Result: DWI dismissed after we convinced prosecutor that “intoxication” could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Case Name: State v. A.S.

Facts: Convenience store called police after believing that our client was intoxicated. Police arrived, and believed that our client had both drove the vehicle to store and intended to drive away from it while intoxicated.

Result: DWI charge dismissed following our pre-trial motions regarding the issue of operation and the admissibility of chemical tests that the client had submitted to.

Case Name: State v. A.T.

Facts: Client charged with DWI and drug possession. Intoxication was based on drugs rather than alcohol, and a urine test combined with a drug recognition expert report disclosed that client was under the influence.

Result: Client ultimately not convicted of either the DWI or drug offenses.

Case Name: State v. E.B.

Facts: Client was involved in a relatively minor car accident. Later charged with DWI after failing sobriety tests and admitting to ingesting certain prescribed medications.

Result: Client ultimately not convicted of DWI. This was a great result, since the client was lawfully prescribed his medications. However, being lawfully prescribed a medication in NJ can still lead to a DWI conviction.

Case Name: State v. J.V.

Facts: Client was in a car accident and could not perform sobriety tests or submit to breath testing due to his condition. The police later directed that his blood be drawn, which resulted in a DWI after his blood alcohol content was found to be above the legal limit.

Result: The DWI charge was dismissed on our pre-trial motions which raised issues regarding the admissibility of the blood rest results and the state’s failure to turn over certain evidence.

Case Name: State v. N.P.

Facts: Client charged with DWI and related motor vehicle offenses in Union County. After being stopped for speeding, client failed sobriety tests and was arrested. Breath testing revealed a BAC well above the legal limit which exposed the client to a minimum 7-12 month license suspension.

Result: We were able to identify a procedural issue which led to the suppression of the breath results. This led to the client pleading guilty with a 3 month license suspension, rather that 7-12 months.

Case Name: State v. T.I.

Facts: Client was involved in a single car accident and was alleged to have left the scene. The police found him at his home, where he appeared to be intoxicated. He was charged with DWI and related offenses.

Result: We argued that the State could not prove that the client was intoxicated within the meaning of the law at the time the accident occurred. This resulted in the dismissal of the DWI charge, which saved the client (because of his prior record) a substantial jail term and license suspension.

Case Name: NJ DYFS v. J.R.

Facts: Trial court approved what is known as a “permanency plan” of the termination our client’s parental rights before we were involved in the case. We later represented the client in the appeal of this decision.

Result: The appellate division agreed with our argument that the trial court failed to properly adhere to certain procedural safeguards that exist in these matters. As a result of our successful appeal, the appeals court reversed the trial court’s decision and sent the case back for further proceedings where our client’s rights were more protected.

Case Name: NJ DYFS v. D.Y.M.

Facts: DYFS removed our client’s child from her home, who had serious behavioral difficulties. Our client, a single mother, was overwhelmed by the child and had reached out to the state for help. She would have having an abuse and neglect finding entered against her before our involvement in the case.

Result: We represented the client on appeal, and successfully argued that she did not “abandon” her child as the trial court had found. This resulted in the reversal of the trial court’s finding of abuse and neglect. Such a finding can have a profound impact on a person’s life.

Case Name: NJ DYFS v. K.H. & L.S.

Facts: Our client’s child had problems which caused the state to advise the client to agree to have the child placed in an inpatient facility. The parent did not agree, and declined to do so. This resulted in a finding of abuse and neglect to be entered against the parent.

Result: We handled the appeal of this matter, which was successful. This resulted in a reversal of the abuse and neglect finding and the removal of our client’s name from what is known as the “central (abuse and neglect) registry.

Case Name: I/M/O C.S.

Facts: Client, a life-long hunter, was denied the issuance of a firearm’s purchaser I.D. card, which is necessary to lawfully purchase a firearm in New Jersey. The client had submitted the application without the assistance of an attorney.

Result: We were retained to handle the appeal. We successfully convinced the Superior Court that the police department was wrong in denying our client his FPIC.

Case Name: State v. M.P.L.

Facts: Client, a green-card holder, was convicted of 2 criminal offenses in a local municipal court before we became involved in his case. This in part led to he being deported from the United States, while much of his family remained here in New Jersey.

Result: We filed a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, which was successful in convincing the court to vacate (or throw out) the client’s guilty pleas and convictions.

Case Name: State v. J.B.

Facts: Client had previously pleaded guilty to very aggravated assault after he was charged with shooting another individual. The trial court entered a substantial restitution award to the victim without adhering to proper procedural safeguards.

Result: After being assigned the client’s appeal, we were successful in having the restitution award reversed and the matter sent back to the trial court where the client would have a fair opportunity to defend against the restitution order.

Case Name: State v. F.F.

Facts: Client was convicted of two criminal charges of harassment after trial in municipal court, where we did not represent him. This resulted in 2 criminal convictions and over $1,000 in fines.

Result: We were retained to appeal the matter to the Superior Court. We were later successful in getting both convictions reversed. This preserved our client’s criminal record. The client was also very pleased when the municipal was required to refund him all the fine money he had paid.

Case Name: State v. J.G.

Facts: Client was 18 years old when she was arrested and charged with theft. She made the initial mistake of not telling her parents or consulting an attorney. She pleaded guilty in court without even speaking to the prosecutor herself to try and enter into a plea agreement. This resulted with a criminal conviction that could not be expunged for 5 years.

Result: We filed what is known as a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, and were successful in having the client’s conviction reversed. She ultimately was able to plead guilty to a non-criminal offense, preserving her record.

Case Name: State v. P.P.

Facts: Client pleaded guilty to going over 100 miles per hour and was sentenced to 10 days in jail. He was taken immediately to the County Jail.

Result: We filed an emergent appeal of the municipal court’s decision, which resulted in the client being almost immediately released from jail. We were later successful in convincing the Superior Court to reverse the entire jail sentence on appeal.

Case Name: State v. S.S.

Facts: Client pleaded guilty to reckless driving, and the municipal court suspended his license for 60 days.

Result: We handled the appeal of the license suspension, and were successful in having the suspension stayed, then reversed, and the matter sent back to the municipal court.

Case Name: State v. Z.L.

Facts: In this criminal matter, our client had been wrongly accused of several criminal offenses. After we successfully obtained a dismissal of all charges, the State prosecutors declined to appeal. However, in a rather unusual procedural move, the victim-complainant proceeded to appeal the matter to the Superior Court, Law Division, Appellate Division, and Supreme Court.

Result: At each level of appeal, we were successful in convincing each court that, mostly for procedural reason, the victim-complainant’s appeal should be dismissed. This was probably one of only a handful of cases in NJ history where the defendant and the prosecutor’s office were actually on the same side in a criminal matter! This result was an enormous relief and success for our client.

LOCATIONS

*ALL LOCATIONS BY APPOINTMENT ONLY*

CALL NOW FOR HELP

732.580.1237

CONNECT WITH US

*No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey | Rating Methodology | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
The information contained in on this website is for general information purposes only. The information is provided by The Law Offices of Anthony J. Vecchio and while we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to The Law Offices of Anthony J. Vecchio or the information, products, or services contained on www.anthonyvecchiolaw.com for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
The results of verdicts and settlements mentioned herein are not typical. Case results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case. Case results do not guarantee or predict a similar result in any future case.

Site by Consultwebs.com: Law Firm Website Designers / Criminal Defense/DWI Lawyer Marketing.