Results Part 2

Client received a sentence for possession of marijuana with intent to deliver. Farrell Weaver & Okun was retained to represent Client. Farrell Weaver & Okun filed a post-conviction petition and argued that the sentence was illegal.

The post-conviction court agreed and reduced Client’s sentence. Client was satisfied.

Client and Co-Defendant planned to commit a robbery of a drug dealer at the drug dealer’s home. Client and Co-Defendant went to drug dealer’s house to find that the Victim (mother of the drug dealer) was home but the drug dealer was not home. Client and Co-Defendant robbed Victim of various items inside the home. When Client was leaving the house, Co-Defendant shot the Victim in the back multiple times resulting in her death. The police were called and both defendants were captured with the stolen property and the guns used in the robbery. The Co-Defendant denied responsibility. Client gave a full confession to the police outlining how the crime occurred.

Client was charged with criminal homicide, robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm without a license, and criminal conspiracy. Farrell Weaver & Okun were privately retained after several attorneys refused to take the case because the Commonwealth would not negotiate a plea deal.

Farrell Weaver & Okun attempted to negotiate with the Office of the District Attorney. The District Attorney’s Office said it would accept a plea by Client to second-degree murder (for criminal homicide) and all other charges. Client would receive a sentence of life without the possibility of parole for second-degree murder and was facing an additional 33½ to 77 years of imprisonment for the remaining charges. Client, on advice from Farrell Weaver & Okun, chose to go to trial.

After a trial, Client was found guilty of third-degree murder, robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm and criminal conspiracy. Farrell Weaver & Okun advocated for a favorable sentence at all counts. Client was sentenced to ten (10) to twenty (25) years of incarceration for third-degree murder followed by ten (10) years of probation for criminal conspiracy. Client also received concurrent sentences (running together to the third-degree murder sentence) as to the other remaining charges.

Client, at age 17, and Co-Defendant planned to rob a pizza delivery driver of money. When the driver was called to a phony address, Co-Defendant and Client appeared. Co-Defendant shot the driver with a sawed-off shot gun killing the victim. The driver was robbed of pizza and a few dollars.

Client was charged with criminal homicide, criminal conspiracy and robbery. Client was facing life imprisonment for his role in the robbery. Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client. Farrell Weaver & Okun and the District Attorney’s Office negotiated a guilty plea for Client whereby Client would plead guilty to third-degree murder, robbery and criminal conspiracy.

Client accepted the guilty plea, where he plead guilty to criminal conspiracy, robbery and third-degree murder. He was sentenced to ten (10) to twenty-five (25) years of incarceration. Given the circumstances of Client’s case, Client was very pleased with the result.

The police accused Client of speeding and chased Client for several miles before Client stopped the vehicle. Client was charged with fleeing and eluding police and speeding. Farrell Weaver & Okun was hired to represent Client. Farrell Weaver & Okun filed pre-trial motions to suppress the evidence flowing from the illegal traffic stop. Farrell Weaver & Okun negotiated with the Commonwealth to obtain a favorable plea bargain.

The District Attorney withdrew the fleeing and eluding charge. Client pleaded guilty to summary disorderly conduct and speeding. Client’s entire record was eventually expunged.

Client was charged with arson and risking catastrophe after Client was accused of torching a neighbor’s car after a dispute. Farrell Weaver & Okun was retained for trial.

After a trial, Client was found not guilty as to both counts.

Client was charged with kidnapping, robbery, robbery of a motor vehicle, aggravated assault, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, sexual assault, terroristic threats, unlawful restraint, false imprisonment, indecent assault, indecent exposure, simple assault, and conspiracy to commit robbery.

The facts were that a female taxi driver stopped at a gas station where she met two (2) young men who needed a ride. When they got near the destination, one of the men produced a firearm and demanded money. Thereafter, it was alleged that Client brutally forced the victim to perform sexual acts upon Client. The victim was stripped of all of her clothes and thrown out of the vehicle. The two men stole the car and left the scene. The victim eventually found help and called the police.

After about 40 minutes from when the two men fled the scene, a police officer spotted the stolen car and gave chase. The stolen car initially was driving down a main thoroughfare but turned onto a neighborhood street where the car traveled at an extremely high and dangerous speed. The police continued to follow the stolen car. The car crashed through a fence and attempted to travel up a hillside, which was someone’s backyard. Eventually, the occupants ran from the police up toward the main thoroughfare.

The police were some distance behind the occupants of the car but drove to the spot on the main thoroughfare where the occupants were last seen running. The police saw Client who was in the area. The police stopped Client and brought the victim to the area where she positively identified Client as one of the robbers and the one who forced her to perform sexual acts. Client was arrested. Client had been on parole for a conviction of robbery.

Client said that he was coming from a friend’s house, where he had been all night. He said that he was walking while listening to music through his phone and earbuds. He said that he heard sirens, stopped, took out his earbuds and saw two (2) young men running from below the hill (where the stolen car had stopped). He said the next thing that he knew was that he was being forced at gunpoint by the police to get on the ground. Then he was arrested.

The Co-Defendant was later arrested and identified by the video from the camera at the gas station.

Farrell Weaver & Okun did an extensive investigation which showed among other things: 1) the video of the second person in the gas station with the Co-Defendant was not Client and much younger than Client, 2) there were age differences between Client and Co-Defendant, 3) there were no ties between Client and Co-Defendant, 4) Client had an alibi witness who placed Client’s location miles away from the crime scene at the time that the crimes occurred, and 5) other relevant matters which showed Client was innocent.

Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client for his jury trial. After reviewing the case, Farrell Weaver & Okun had several discussions with the District Attorney regarding major problems with the case and the fact that Client was innocent.

Persuaded by Farrell Weaver & Okun arguments, the Commonwealth looked to juvenile probation officers that knew the Co-Defendant and asked these juvenile probation officers to review the videotape. One officer actually identified the other person in the videotape at the gas station who was with Co-Defendant. This person was a friend of Co-Defendant and obviously not Client.

The victim had identified Client as her attacker two (2) times: 1) on the night that the crimes occurred and 2) at the preliminary hearing. After the Commonwealth informed the victim that it appeared that her identification may have been wrong, the victim agreed that she may have been mistaken.

The District Attorney concurred with Farrell Weaver & Okun’ assessment of the case that Client was innocent and dismissed the charges against Client. All charges were removed from Client’s record. Client was extremely pleased with the result.

Client was charged with aggravated assault, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (2 counts), and possession of a prohibited offensive weapon. After an evening at a local establishment, a fight occurred whereby Client was attacked by numerous individuals. While on the ground where Client was kicked and beaten, Client stabbed one attacker and possibly stabbed a second individual. It was alleged that Co-Defendant fought with other individuals and stabbed the person previously described as second individual. Farrell Weaver & Okun was hired to represent Client. After review, Farrell Weaver & Okun discussed with the District Attorney about the circumstances behind the charges and explained how there were problems in proving their case.

The District Attorney agreed with Farrell Weaver & Okun and dismissed all charges against Client and Co-Defendant. Client was very pleased with the result.

Client was charged with aggravated assault, simple assault, and disorderly conduct. Client hired Farrell Weaver & Okun to represent him for his trial.

Farrell Weaver & Okun zealously advocated and represented Client. At the end of the trial, a verdict of not guilty as to all counts was entered. Farrell Weaver & Okun expunged Client’s record. Client was happy with the result.

Client was charged with possession with intent to deliver. Farrell Weaver & Okun was hired to represent Client for his trial. After several discussions and negotiations with the District Attorney, the District Attorney and Farrell Weaver & Okun agreed to a guilty plea for Client.

Client accepted the negotiated guilty plea, where Client plead guilty to a summary offense of disorderly conduct with no further penalty. Client was more than pleased with the result.

Client and Co-Defendant were confronted by the victim outside of a store. Client and the victim began fighting. Co-Defendant obtained Client’s firearm which had been stored under the driver’s seat of Client’s car. Co-Defendant came out of the car and shot the victim resulting in the victim’s immediate death. It was alleged that Client encouraged Co-Defendant by telling him to kill the victim.

Client was charged with criminal homicide, criminal solicitation and criminal conspiracy. Client hired Farrell Weaver & Okun for his jury trial. Farrell Weaver & Okun presented character witnesses to show that Client had a good reputation in the community for non-violence and law abidingness. Farrell & Associations also called eye witnesses that testified that Client did not say anything to encourage Co-Defendant to shoot the victim and other evidence. The Commonwealth witnesses were also extensively cross-examined.

Client was found not guilty of all charges. Client was extremely pleased with the result.

Client was charged as an adult with two (2) counts of robbery and one (1) count of criminal conspiracy to commit robbery. The facts of the case were that Client robbed two (2) victims at gunpoint at the same time while Co-Defendant assisted. Co-Defendant and Client were caught by the police shortly afterward.

Farrell Weaver & Okun filed a motion to transfer Client’s case to juvenile court based upon Client’s lack of record and amenability for rehabilitation. After a hearing, Client’s case was transferred to juvenile court. (Co-Defendant’s case was not transferred and Co-Defendant was convicted of felonies and sentenced to jail.)

Farrell Weaver & Okun had numerous discussions with the Office of the District Attorney, which resulted in the District Attorney’s Office to offer a Consent Decree for Client.

Client accepted the Consent Decree. Client was placed on probation and after the completion of his probation, his charges were dismissed and expunged from his criminal and juvenile record.

Client was charged with luring child into a motor vehicle, corruption of minors, stalking, and harassment. Farrell Weaver & Okun was hired to represented Client.

A young child victim was walking on a sidewalk when a car approached. The driver of the car asked the victim to get in. The victim said no, and after the driver insisted, the victim told the driver that the police would be called. The car drove away. The victim called the police and reported the incident. A description of the driver and of the car was given to the police.

The next day, the victim and the victim’s mother were driving in the area when the victim said that she saw the guy that tried to lure the victim into the car. The victim and the victim’s mother followed Client’s car to Client’s work where the victim identified Client. The police arrived and obtained the vehicle information.

The investigating officer showed a picture of Client to victim who identified Client as the person that the victim and victim’s mother saw the day after the crime. The investigating officer wrote an affidavit of probable cause, leaving out extremely important information about the description of the suspect, which was not similar to Client, and the description of the car, which was not similar to Client’s car.

Farrell Weaver & Okun were hired to represent Client. At the preliminary hearing, counsel told the officer that Client had an alibi and was actually in another county at the time of the crime. The officer said he did not care to hear any of this because he got the right man. The victim testified that the description of the car of the suspect was identical to Client’s car. All charges except stalking were held for court.

Prior to trial, Farrell Weaver & Okun continued to request copies of the initial reports and all police reports but were told that the investigating officer hadn’t turned them over to the District Attorney. Farrell Weaver & Okun subpoenaed all of the reports in the matter.

Minutes before the trial, the police reports were given to Farrell Weaver & Okun and the District Attorney’s Office. The police reports showed that there were major discrepancies in the initial description of the suspect and Client and the suspect’s car and Client’s car (number of doors, stickers and dents on car, plate numbers were different.)

Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client at trial. All of the discrepancies of the victim’s testimony concerning the description of the suspect and suspect’s car versus Client and Client’s car were highlighted. Testimony and evidence from the defense showed that at the time of the crime, Client was 50 plus miles away in another county. This evidence included: testimony from Client, testimony from several people who saw Client’s car and Client, phone records that Client’s phone, which he used to communicate to others, was located in the other county.

Farrell Weaver & Okun successfully got a not guilty verdict for all counts against Client. Farrell Weaver & Okun expunged Client’s record of all the charges. Client was extremely pleased with the result. NOTE: Client hired a civil attorney who sued the investigating officer and received a large amount of money for damages because the officer hid information in the affidavit of probable cause.

Client was charged with robbery. Farrell Weaver & Okun was hired to represent Client for his jury trial. Farrell Weaver & Okun negotiated with the District Attorney on several occasions to work Client’s case out. The District Attorney and Farrell Weaver & Okun were able to come to a negotiated guilty plea.

Client accepted the negotiated guilty plea, where Client pleaded guilty to a summary offense disorderly conduct and was sentenced to ninety (90) days probation. The charge of robbery was withdrawn. Client was very pleased with this result.

Client was charged as an adult with criminal attempt homicide, aggravated assault, tampering with physical evidence, and possession of a firearm by a minor. The facts of the allegation were that the victim and another individual were driving when Client shot at the victim’s car and struck him causing serious bodily injury. The victim drove to an area when the passenger fled the scene. The victim said that the did not know who shot him. DetectiveS investigated the incident.

Client explained that he was told by the victim that on that particular day it would be the last day Client would be alive, Client chose to take his relative’s gun to school. He hid the gun outside until the end of the school day. When he walked home, the victim and the victim’s passenger looked at him and circled the block. Client thought that he was going to be killed so Client pulled out the gun and shot the victim. Client went home and told his mother who called the police and told them. That is how Client got caught.

Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client. Farrell Weaver & Okun filed a motion to transfer the case to juvenile court. Although Client was close to age 18, the charges were serious, and the victim had been seriously injured, the case was transferred to juvenile court.

Client was sent to a juvenile facility for six (6) months in West Virginia where he obtained life skills while being in the outdoors. Client has no adult record and can expunge the juvenile adjudication a the appropriate time.

Client was charged as a juvenile with threat to use weapons of mass destruction, terroristic threats, causing or risking a catastrophe, institutional vandalism, and disorderly conduct. It was alleged that Client wrote a threat on a wall of a school indicating that a bomb would explode.

Farrell Weaver & Okun was hired to represent Client for his juvenile adjudication. After several discussion and negotiations with the District Attorney, the District Attorney offered a Consent Decree to Client.

Client accepted the Consent Decree and was sentenced to community service. After completion of the disposition, Client’s record was expunged.

Client was charged by juvenile petition of rape and indecent assault of a younger family member. Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client through extensive process. Juvenile was prohibited from seeing family member and being around children. Psychiatric experts were obtained.

Through hours of negotiations, Farrell Weaver & Okun convinced the Office of the District Attorney to give Client a consent decree.

Client was given a consent decree whereby he was required to be involved in extensive psychiatric counseling and other conditions. Once the probation was concluded, the charges were dismissed. The charges have been expunged.

Defendant was convicted of aggravated assault and given a sentence of eight (8) to twenty (20) years of incarceration. Farrell Weaver & Okun were retained to handle the direct appeal. Farrell Weaver & Okun argued that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to understand the sentencing guidelines.

The Superior Court agreed and a new sentencing hearing was granted.

On remand, Defendant received a far less sentence. Client was satisfied with the Results.

Defendant won pretrial motions to sever numerous robbery counts from robbery and homicide case, and the Commonwealth appealed. Farrell Weaver & Okun handled the appeal.

The Defendant won the appeal in the Superior Court and Supreme Court. The order severing the robbery counts from the homicide case was affirmed.

The trial court granted the Defendant’s request to dismiss DUI charges because there was a violation of the speedy trial rule. The Commonwealth appealed. Farrell Weaver & Okun were contacted by the trial attorney to assist in the appeal.

The Superior Court affirmed the trial court ruling, and the Defendant was released from the criminal charges.

The trial court found Defendant guilty of two (2) counts of unlawful acquisition of a controlled substance (felony), one count of possession and two (2) counts of theft (misdemeanors). The facts were that the Defendant was a pharmacist who stole controlled substances and immediately ingested them. Defendant was sentenced to a total of ten (10) years of probation. Trial counsel contacted Farrell Weaver & Okun in order to effectuate an appeal to the Superior Court. On appeal, Farrell Weaver & Okun argued that the Commonwealth failed to prove the charge of felony unlawful acquisition because there was no fraud or misrepresentation.

The Superior Court ruled that the Commonwealth failed to prove the elements of fraud for unlawful acquisition. Thus, the Superior Court vacated the two (2) felony charges and remanded the case for a new sentencing hearing.

Trial counsel again represented Defendant for resentencing. Defendant was given five (5) years of probation. Client now has the ability to retain his license to be a pharmacist at the appropriate time.

The trial court found that Client did not refuse to take chemical test after being arrested for DUI and, therefore, Client should not lose driving privileges one (1) year. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (Penn DOT) appealed to the Commonwealth Court. Trial counsel referred the appeal to Farrell Weaver & Okun.

The Commonwealth Court affirmed the ruling by the trial court. Client did not lose privileges of driving.

Client was convicted of robbery of a motor vehicle, aggravated assault on a police officer, five (5) counts of accidents involving bodily injury, five (5) counts of accidents involving injury, sixteen (16) counts of recklessly endangering another person, one (1) count of fleeing and eluding, one (1) count of accidents involving damage to attended vehicles and one (1) count of criminal attempt (robbery of a motor vehicle). The Commonwealth proved that the police attempted to stop Client for traffic violations when Client fled by driving his vehicle on the wrong way of a major highway, then entered on the correct lane while police cars chased him. Client’s vehicle crashed into various cars and objects during the chase. When Client crashed his car into the last vehicle, that vehicle had been stopped because of heavy traffic. Client exited his vehicle and ran to another vehicle going the opposite way. Client attempted by force to steal the car from a victim. In Client’s attempt to steal the car, a police officer was almost struck by the vehicle. Client was caught inside the vehicle by the police who had by that time surrounded the car.

Client received an aggregate sentence of ten (10) to twenty (20) years of incarceration. After a direct appeal that was handled by trial counsel’s firm, Client retained Farrell Weaver & Okun. Farrell Weaver & Okun filed a post-conviction petition contending, among other things, that prior counsel gave ineffective assistance for failing to properly argue that there was insufficient evidence to prove the crime of robbery of a motor vehicle because no actual theft of the car occurred. Farrell Weaver & Okun argued that the robbery of a motor vehicle (a crime to which Client received a sentence of five (5) to ten (10) years of imprisonment) should be vacated.

The post-conviction court agreed with Farrell Weaver & Okun’ argument and granted Client relief in the form of vacating the sentence and dismissing the charge of robbery of a motor vehicle. Because the actions of the court disturbed the sentencing scheme, the court re-sentenced Client. At the re-sentencing hearing, Farrell Weaver & Okun argued that Client was rehabilitated and that he needed no further incarceration. The court re-sentenced Client to the time that already had been served by Client plus many years of probation. As a result, Client was released from prison. Client was extremely pleased to have his sentence of ten (10) to twenty (20) years of incarceration be reduced to time served plus probation.

Client was previously convicted of second-degree murder, robbery, burglary, and criminal conspiracy after a jury trial. He was given a mandatory sentence of life without the possibility of parole. The Commonwealth contended that Client along with his co-defendant entered the victim’s house with force, beat the victim to death, and stole money.

Farrell Weaver & Okun were hired to handle the post-conviction proceedings. The argument was presented that there was prosecutorial misconduct when the prosecutor used false testimony against Client. A new trial was granted.

After negotiations, Farrell Weaver & Okun obtained a deal whereby Client pleaded guilty to third-degree murder and received a sentence of five to ten years of incarceration followed by five years of probation. Client accepted the plea bargain and was released shortly thereafter. Client was very happy with the Results obtained.

Client pleaded guilty to numerous burglaries and received a significant prison sentence.

Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client at the post-conviction proceeding contending that the plea was not voluntarily entered because the Commonwealth’s promises of concurrent sentences were not followed. Client was permitted to withdraw his guilty plea.

Farrell Weaver & Okun got a deal whereby Client pleaded guilty to the same charges in exchange for a probationary sentence. Client came home and was extremely pleased with the Results.

After a jury trial, Client was found guilty of first-degree murder and received a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The facts were that an altercation occurred after Client accused the victim of stealing Client’s money. Client chased the victim for several blocks where the altercation continued, and Client stabbed victim to death.

Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client after Client lost his post-conviction appeal in the Superior Court. Farrell Weaver & Okun convinced the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to accept the appeal. The Supreme Court agreed with Farrell Weaver & Okun’ argument that prior counsel gave ineffective assistance for failing to argue that trial counsel did not obtain psychiatric evidence to prove diminished capacity (third-degree murder). A new trial was granted.

When the case was remanded to the trial court, Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client in a jury trial whereby Client was found guilty of third-degree murder and sentenced to ten to twenty years of incarceration. Client was very satisfied with the Results.

After a jury trial, Client was found guilty of raping two (2) victims during two (2) different events one night. Client received a very heavy sentence — essentially a life sentence.

Farrell Weaver & Okun were hired to handle the post-conviction proceedings. The argument raised was that prior counsel failed to ask for a specific instruction concerning his alibi to the jury. A new trial was granted.

Farrell Weaver & Okun negotiated with the Commonwealth for a sentence of credit for time served followed by probation. Client was immediately released from prison and placed on probation. Client was extremely pleased.

After a jury trial, Client was found guilty of aggravated indecent assault, criminal conspiracy, sexual abuse of children and corruption of minors. Client was sentenced to an aggregate sentence of four (4) to eight (8) years of incarceration. Client was given bond pending appeal and appealed. After the appeal was concluded, Client started the sentence and hired Farrell Weaver & Okun to file a post-conviction petition.

Farrell Weaver & Okun argued that the jury was improperly interfered with by court staff during deliberations. The Commonwealth responded by offering Client a guilty plea agreement whereby Client would receive a new trial and be resentenced to credit for time served followed by probation. Client accepted the deal. A new trial was granted, Client pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to probation. Client had served less than one (1) year. Client was extremely pleased with the Results.

Client pleaded guilty to numerous sexual offenses and received an extensive sentence. Farrell Weaver & Okun were retained and filed a post-conviction petition arguing that Client was denied his right to allocution and that criminal attempt merged with the charge of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

A new sentencing hearing was granted whereby Client received a reduction in sentence.

Client was a first-time offender who was tried for crimes of aggravated assault and conspiracy to commit aggravated assault. He was found guilty and sentenced to three (3) to six (6) years of imprisonment plus probation. Farrell Weaver & Okun were retained and filed a post-conviction petition. The argument was that Client was denied his right to file post-sentencing motions, that the court used the wrong guidelines, and that Client was denied his right of allocution. A hearing was conducted.

After the hearing, the court immediately reinstated Client’s right to file post-sentencing motions. That same day in the afternoon, the court heard the written post-sentencing motions, vacated the sentence, and resentenced Client to a county jail sentence plus probation. Client was paroled after Farrell Weaver & Okun filed a motion to release Client. Client served approximately fourteen months of incarceration before he was released.

Client was charged and convicted of the following charges: at the first criminal information with involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, sexual abuse of children, corruption of minors, at the second criminal information with criminal attempt (statutory sexual assault), involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, sexual abuse of children, furnishing liquor to minors and corruption of minors. The allegations were that Client met two female girls (ages 13 and 14), gave them alcoholic beverages, and seduced them in a motel. Thereafter, Client took pictures of one girl in her naked state. Client was sentenced to an aggregate sentence of thirteen and one half (13½) to twenty-seven (27) years of incarceration.

After being retained to represent Client, Farrell Weaver & Okun filed a post-conviction petition contending that counsel gave ineffective assistance for failing to ask for a jury instruction that Client was under the mistaken belief that both girls were over the age of consent. The argument was based upon the fact that the law allowed for such an instruction as to the type of charges brought against Client. A hearing was conducted.

Upon strong urging by Farrell Weaver & Okun, the Commonwealth offered a deal whereby they would agree that Client would receive a new trial if Client was to plead to the charges and receive a total sentence of five (5) to ten (10) years of imprisonment. A new trial was ordered, Client pleaded guilty to the charges and received a sentence reduction of five (5) to ten (10) years of incarceration. Client was pleased with the deal.

Client was found guilty of robbery, aggravated assault, carrying a firearm without a license and receiving stolen property after a jury trial. Client was sentenced to eight and one half (8½) to seventeen (17) years of incarceration. Proof at trial showed that Client went to the home of the victim and attempted to rob him at gunpoint with a stolen handgun. A struggle occurred where the victim slammed the door and the gun went off striking the victim in the neck.

Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client and contended that trial counsel gave ineffective assistance for failing to have Client properly waive his right to a no-adverse inference instruction. The trial court granted a new trial but the Commonwealth appealed. On appeal, the Superior Court remanded for another hearing to determine whether Client was actually prejudiced.

Before a hearing was conducted, the Commonwealth offered Client a deal whereby Client would receive a new trial, plead guilty and receive a new sentence of five (5) to ten (10) years of incarceration with credit for time served. Client chose to accept the deal in an effort to receive an immediate reduction of sentence. Client was extremely happy with the Results.

Client was charged with aggravated assault, simple assault, public intoxication, trespassing, disorderly conduct, and criminal mischief. The Commonwealth alleged that after being told to leave an establishment, Client returned and got into an altercation with several individuals whereby he jumped on the back of a police officer and ripped the officer’s uniform. Farrell Weaver & Okun were hired to try to resolve the case at the preliminary hearing.

Client pleaded guilty to various summary offenses whereby he received a fine but no other penalty. All of Client’s charges were eventually expunged from his criminal record.

Client was charged with possession of heroin and drug paraphernalia when the police alleged that they were called to a supermarket by a citizen and found Client passed out in the driver’s seat with needle in arm.

After argument by Farrell Weaver & Okun, the court dismissed the charges.

Client was charged with possession of a weapon on school property, possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of alcoholic beverages by a minor, misdemeanor harassment and disorderly conduct. The allegations were that school officials were conducting an investigation that Client was distributing marijuana on school property. When Client was confronted by a school official at his school locker, Client struck the school official and ran. A search of Client’s locker revealed alcohol, drug paraphernalia and a handgun that fired BBs. Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client at the preliminary hearing.

Upon urging by Farrell Weaver & Okun, the Commonwealth amended the count of misdemeanor harassment to summary harassment and Client pleaded guilty to the two (2) summary counts of harassment and disorderly conduct. The remaining charges were withdrawn by the Commonwealth. Farrell Weaver & Okun had the withdrawn charges expunged from Client’s criminal record. Client was entitled to have the remaining summary offenses expunged from his criminal record five (5) years after conviction.

Client was charged with aggravated assault, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Farrell Weaver & Okun represented Client at the preliminary hearing.

Farrell Weaver & Okun convinced the Commonwealth to dismiss all charges against Client. Farrell Weaver & Okun obtained an order to expunge Client’s criminal record regarding this case.

Client was being investigated on a rape claim reported at the University of Pittsburgh. Client hired Farrell Weaver & Okun, preemptively, before charges were formally filed. Farrell Weaver & Okun dealt with the police and discussed the allegations regarding our Client.

After Farrell Weaver & Okun met with the police, they ceased the investigation and never filed charges against Client. Client was very pleased with the Results as he continues to not have a criminal record.

Go Back to Part 1