Results

CASE SUMMARIES

These are some of the cases that Farrell & Associates have handled.  The names of the actual clients have been redacted.

 

DUI CASE SUPPRESSED (JD00000184):

BACKGROUND:

Client was arrested for two (2) separate criminal informations (cases) of DUI.  Concerning one (1) DUI case, it was alleged by the Commonwealth that Client was speeding and was properly stopped and arrested for DUI.  Farrell & Associates filed a motion to suppress the evidence based upon the argument that the police had no proper basis to stop Client.  The argument was that the officer had no probable cause to believe that Client was speeding.  

RESULTS:

After a hearing was conducted by the trial court, the trial court suppressed all evidence based upon the fact that the police had no grounds to stop Client (the police could not prove that they had probable cause to show that Client was speeding).  The one (1) criminal information of charging DUI and speeding was withdrawn by the Commonwealth because the evidence was suppressed.  As to the second DUI charge, Client was accepted into the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (“ARD”) Program and the charges were dismissed.  Client lost his license for sixty (60) days rather than two and one half (2½) years.  It is an understatement to say that Client was extremely satisfied.

 

POSSESSION OF A FIREARM WITHOUT A LICENSE CHARGE DROPPED (DG00000168):

BACKGROUND:

Client was stopped by the police driving her vehicle with various passengers.  The Commonwealth alleged that Client possessed a firearm without a license and was driving without a license.

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates convinced the District Attorney’s Office to withdraw all charges.  The court dismissed all charges.

 

DUI CASE SUPPRESSED (TH00000188):

BACKGROUND:

Client was arrested for two (2) separate criminal informations of DUI.  Concerning one (1) DUI case, the police stopped Client after it was alleged that Client performed an illegal U-Turn in order to circumvent a police DUI check-point.  Farrell & Associates filed a motion to suppress contending that the stop by the police was unlawful in that there was no probable cause to believe Client had conducted an illegal U-Turn.  

RESULTS:

After an extensive hearing, with testimony from the police officer, Client, and an investigator presenting photographs and measurements, the trial court agreed with Farrell & Associates and suppressed the evidence.  The Commonwealth withdrew the charges at the one criminal case.  As to the second criminal case, Client was accepted into the ARD program for first-time offenders and the charges were dismissed.  Client lost his license for sixty (60) days.  Had he been found guilty of the two (2) DUI cases, he would have lost his license for two and one half (2½) years.  Client was overjoyed by the representation of Farrell & Associates.

 

POSSESSION OF A FIREARM CHARGE DROPPED (HH00000130):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with unlawfully possessing a firearm in a car, being a convicted felon in possession of a handgun, possession of an instrument of crime, careless driving, and driving while his license was suspended.  The allegations were that Client was driving in a careless manner, was stopped for careless driving when it was determined that Client was driving with a suspended driver’s license because his license was suspended for a DUI conviction.  Farrell & Associates filed a motion to suppress arguing the stop was illegal, that there was no careless driving and that all evidence should be suppressed.

RESULTS:

The trial court agreed with Farrell & Associates and ruled that all evidence should be suppressed.  All charges were dismissed.

  

LIFE SENTENCE OVERTURNED IN SUPREME COURT (RM00099126):

BACKGROUND:

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.    

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates represented Client after he lost his post-conviction appeal in the Superior Court.  Farrell & Associates convinced the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to accept the appeal.  The Supreme Court agreed with Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates represented Client in a trial whereby Client was found guilty of third-degree murder and sentenced to ten to twenty years of incarceration.   Needless to say, Client was very satisfied with the results obtained.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF ASSAULT (ST00010168):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with three (3) separate cases. In the first case, Client was charged with burglary and two (2) counts of simple assault.  The allegation was that Client entered the victim’s home and committed two simple assaults.

In the second case, Client was charged with one (1) count each of aggravated assault, recklessly endangering another person, driving without a license and two (2) counts of harassment. The allegations were that Client was driving his truck and attempted to run the victim off the road to cause serious bodily injury.

In the third case, the Commonwealth charged Client with one (1) count each of simple assault and harassment.  The Commonwealth theory was that Client verbally harassed the victim and then assaulted the victim resulting in medical bills of over $20,000.00.  The Commonwealth asked that Client plead guilty, receive probation and pay restitution as to all of the medical bills.

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial and obtained the following results: as to the first case, Client pleaded guilty to the simple assault charges and the burglary count was dismissed.  As to the second case, Client pleaded guilty to harassment (summary offense) and driving without a license.  As to the final case, the case was tried.  Client was found guilty of harassment (summary offense) and not guilty of simple assault.  Farrell & Associates convinced the court that the restitution requested by the prosecution was not applicable because the harassment charge only went to the verbal confrontation and not to any physical injuries.  No restitution was ordered.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (EP00001158):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with aggravated assault by attempting to cause and/or causing serious bodily injury to the victim.  Farrell & Associates represented Client at a trial.

RESULTS:

Client was found not guilty of all charges and was discharged.  Client had criminal record expunged.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF EIGHT COUNTS OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (AD0001180):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with eight (8) counts of aggravated assault, and one (1) count each of terroristic threats and criminal mischief.   The allegations were that Client was in a vehicle following a second vehicle containing various people include a person that Client had strongly disliked.  It was further alleged that Client rammed his vehicle into the other vehicle causing damage (criminal mischief), began threatening the occupants with crimes, and then began shooting at the second vehicle.  A trial occurred whereby Farrell & Associates represented Client.  At the trial, various persons testified that Client committed the crimes.

RESULTS:

Client was found not guilty of all charges and was released.  The charges were later expunged by Farrell & Associates.  Client was very happy.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF RAPE (DD00001193):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with rape and criminal conspiracy. Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial.  At trial, the victim, an adult female, testified that Client along with his female co-defendant sexually assaulted the victim while everyone was partying.

RESULTS:

Client was found not guilty of all charges and discharged.  The charges were expunged at a later date.  Client was satisfied.    

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF RAPE AND SEX OFFENSES (CK00002106):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse and unlawful restraint.  The allegations were that Client and the victim worked at a restaurant where Client restrained and then sexually assaulted the victim in the bathroom while both individuals were on break.  Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial.  Various witnesses testified for both parties.

RESULTS:

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

 

HOMICIDE BY VEHICLE AND INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER CHARGES DISMISSED (DR00002139):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with two (2) counts of homicide by vehicle DUI related, two (2) counts of involuntary manslaughter, three (3) counts of recklessly endangering another person and one (1) count of DUI.  The Commonwealth alleged that Client was driving intoxicated when Client caused an accident killing two (2) individuals and placing another individual at risk of serious bodily injury.  Farrell & Associates represented Client before the time Client was arrested to the conclusions of the proceedings.  Prior to trial Farrell & Associates filed a motion to dismiss based upon the fact that the Commonwealth could not prove that Client caused the accident.

RESULTS:

The trial court agreed with Farrell & Associates and ruled that the charges of homicide by vehicle DUI related, involuntary manslaughter and recklessly endangering another person should be dismissed.  Thereafter, Client went to trial for the DUI charge but was found guilty and sentenced to house arrest.  Client was very happy with the results.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF RECKLESSLY ENDANGERING ANOTHER PRSON AND FLEEING (EM00002170):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with three (3) counts of recklessly endangering another person, one count each of disorderly conduct and fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer as well as eleven (11) summary traffic counts.  The allegations were that Client while driving a motor cycle violated the traffic laws, would not stop for police officers in pursuit and placed three (3) persons in danger of serious bodily injury.  Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial.

RESULTS:

After a trial, Client was found not guilty of all charges and was discharged.

 

JURY FINDS CLIENT NOT GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (DS00002178):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with two (2) counts each of aggravated assault, simple assault, and harassment along with one (1) count of disorderly conduct.  The Commonwealth alleged that while Client was a prisoner in a state prison, Client became angry, and began punching two (2) correctional officers causing injuries to them.  Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial.

RESULTS:

After a jury trial, Client was found not guilty of all crimes by the jury and not guilty of all summary offenses by the trial court.   The charges were later expunged from Client’s criminal record.  

 

CLIENT CHARGED WITH CRIMINAL ATTEMPT HOMICIDE RECEIVES SUMMARY CITATION (RB00006277):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with simple assault, aggravated assault, recklessly endangering another person, disorderly conduct, possession of instruments of crime, possession of sawed-off shotgun and criminal attempt (homicide).  Farrell & Associates represented Client at the preliminary hearing and trial.

RESULTS:

Client was found guilty of harassment (summary offense), while Client was found not guilty as to the remaining charges.  The remaining charges have been expunged.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF POSSESSION OF A FIREARM WITHOUT A LICENSE (DS00006282):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with possession of a firearm without a license.  A gun was found inside of a vehicle that Client was occupying.  Client retained Farrell & Associates to represent him at trial.

RESULTS: 

Client was found not guilty of the charges and the charges have been expunged from his record.

 

POSSESSION OF COCAINE CHARGES DISMISSED; CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF DUI (GK00003000):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with possession of a controlled substance, two (2) counts of DUI and trespass by motor vehicle.  The charges stemmed from Client driving in an area which was prohibited to traffic.  Client met friends and were discussing the situation when the police arrived and searched Client’s friends.  One of the friends possessed cocaine. When the police arrested the friend, Client attempted to steal the cocaine which was on the hood of the Client’s car.   Because the police were busy, they chose to let Client go home.  The police took Client’s friend to the police station.  Later in time, Client arrived at the police station visibly intoxicated and asking about the welfare of his friend.  The police asked Client where his vehicle was located and Client told them the car was in the police parking lot.  Armed with this information, the police arrested Client and charged him with the above charges.  Client refused to take an intoxilizer after he was told that he was required by law to do so. The police contacted Penn DOT whereby Penn DOT notified Client that he was going to lose his license for one (1) year additional to any other penalty.  Client hired Farrell & Associates to handle all of his legal matters.

RESULTS:

At the preliminary hearing, Farrell & Associates got a dismissal of all charges except the DUI charges.   Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial whereby the Client was found not guilty of DUI charges.  Farrell & Associates filed an appeal to the Court of Common Pleas with respect to the license suspension.  The trial court agreed with Farrell & Associates argument that the arrest by the police was improper and Client should not lose his license.  While Client was initially looking at a total loss of license for twenty-four (24) months along with possible jail time and other penalties.  Client was set free without any direct or collateral consequences.  Client was extremely pleased.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF BURGLARY AND CONSPIRACY (RW0006306):

BACKGROUND:

Client along with another were charged with burglary, criminal conspiracy and receiving stolen property.  The charges stemmed from an individual (“Victim”) reporting that someone had stolen articles from his house.  Client sold the stolen items and was ultimately arrested for the charges.  Client told the police that Victim’s relative (“Relative”) had sold Client the articles and he believed that they were not stolen.  He further denied burglarizing the house.  Relative testified that he saw Client and his Co-Defendant steal the articles because Relative helped them in burglarizing the house.  Relative was never charged with any crime because Relative cooperated, Victim did not want Relative charged, and the police were convinced that Client masterminded the burglary coercing Relative.  Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial.

RESULTS:

Client (and his co-defendant) were found not guilty of all charges.  Client’s charges have been expunged from his criminal record.

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF HOMICIDE (AN00008143):

BACKGROUND:

Client’s friend (Co-Defendant 1) was beaten and robbed in a house during a drug deal.  While Co-Defendant 1 went to the hospital, Client’s other friend (Co-Defendant 2) went to the house where the robbery occurred and shot up the house along with the cars parked in the driveway.  They went home and found Co-Defendant 1 had been released from the hospital.  Co-Defendant 1, Co-Defendant 2, and Client went back to the house.  The front door was kicked in by Client.  It was alleged that Client placed a barrel of a firearm in a female’s mouth.  Co-Defendant 1 and Co-Defendant 2 went upstairs while Client remained on the first floor.  Co-Defendant 1 shot three (3) people, killing one, and seriously injuring two.  The three fled.  

Client was charged with burglary, simple assault, criminal homicide, criminal conspiracy and two counts of aggravated assault. The maximum penalties that Client was facing were as follows: mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for first-degree murder, mandatory  life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for second-degree murder (a killing by the defendant or a co-defendant that occurred during a felony such as burglary), 20 to 40 years for third-degree murder, 10 to 20 years for burglary, 10 to 20 years for conspiracy, 1 to 2 years for simple assault, and 10 to 20 years for each aggravated assault.   Farrell & Associates represented Client at trial.  

RESULTS OF FIRST TRIAL:

Client and Co-Defendant 1 were tried together.  Co-Defendant 2 along with numerous witnesses testified against Client and Co-Defendant 1.  The jury found Client guilty of criminal trespass (felony of the third-degree) (lesser included offense of burglary) and not guilty of first-degree murder, second-degree murder, burglary, criminal conspiracy and two counts of aggravated assault. The jury could not reach a verdict as to third-degree murder.

RESULTS OF SECOND TRIAL:

A re-trial occurred only as to the third-degree murder charge.  Farrell and Associates continued to represent Client.  The jury found Client not guilty of third-degree murder.  Client received a favorable sentence.  Client was extremely pleased.  

 

POSSESSION OF HEROIN WITHDRAWN AFTER EVIDENCE SUPPRESSED (EF00008167):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with possession of a controlled substance, possession of drug paraphernalia, and general lighting requirements after being pulled over by a Pittsburgh Police Department Officer. The police stopped Client based upon the belief that Client’s back lights were not properly working.  When the police approached Client, the police saw heroin in the car and arrested Client.  

Client hired Farrell & Associates. Farrell & Associates, after reviewing the facts of Client’s case, decided to file a motion to suppress the traffic stop because it violated the Pennsylvania and United States Constitution.  A hearing occurred.

RESULTS:

The Trial Court agreed with Farrell & Associates analysis of the traffic stop, that the stop lacked probable cause. The Court granted the motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the illegal stop.  As a result of the suppression order, all of the charges were withdrawn. Farrell & Associates proceeded to expunge Client’s record of all the criminal charges. 

 

JURY FINDS CLIENT NOT GUILTY OF CRIMINAL ATTEMPT HOMICIDE, AND AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (TC00008250):

BACKGROUND:

The allegations were that Client rented a car for a piece of crack cocaine and used the car to shoot the Victim.  It was further alleged that Client shot the Victim a couple times.  The Victim almost died but lived as a paraplegic for the rest of his life.   Client was charged with criminal attempt homicide, aggravated assault, and carrying a firearm without a license. He was facing a maximum penalty of 23½ to 47 years of incarceration.  At trial, the Commonwealth presented evidence that the Victim (who knew Client) identified Client from a photographic array, and the owner of the car testified that Client was the one in possession of the car during the shooting.  Farrell & Associates represented Client. Farrell & Associates and Client proceeded to a jury trial. 

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates argued that Client had an alibi and could not have committed the crimes. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty as to all counts. 

 

CLIENT CHARGED WITH HOMICIDE RECEIVES FIVE YEAR JAIL SENTENCE (BL00009176):

BACKGROUND:

The allegations were that Client along with others entered a house of a drug dealer and robbed him.  During the course of the robbery, the Victim was killed by a co-defendant. Client was charged with criminal homicide, robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm, and criminal conspiracy.  Client was facing a maximum sentence of life without the possibility of parole followed by 33½ to 67 years of incarceration.  Farrell and Associates negotiated with the prosecutor and obtained the following plea agreement.  

RESULTS:

Client plead guilty to third-degree murder, robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm, and conspiracy.  Pursuant to the agreement, Client received time served for five (5) years of incarceration followed by ten (10) years of probation. Client was released and was very pleased with the result. 

 

CLIENT SENTENCED TO PROBATION FOR INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER (KK00009196):

BACKGROUND:

Client injected heroin into the Victim’s arm because the Victim wanted to get high.  The Victim died of an overdose.  The police contacted Client who confessed. Client hired Farrell & Associates to represent Client for trial. Client was charged with involuntary manslaughter, delivery of a controlled substance and delivery of a controlled substance resulting in a death. Farrell & Associates made contact with the District Attorney to discuss negotiating a guilty plea. After several discussions, Farrell & Associates and the District Attorney came to a favorable agreement. 

RESULTS:

Client accepted a guilty plea, where Client plead guilty to involuntary manslaughter and delivery of a controlled substance.  The remaining count was withdrawn.  Farrell & Associates presented argument to the judge at sentencing.   Client received a sentence of time served for the pretrial incarceration for a few weeks at the jail and inpatient drug treatment program and an additional five (5) years of probation. 

 

POSSESSION WITH THE INTENT TO DELIVER CHARGES DISMISSED (LP00009203):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with possession of a controlled substance with the intent to deliver (2 counts), possession of a controlled substance (2 counts), possession of marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia. A large amount of heroin, some marijuana and drug paraphernalia were located inside the house that Client owned and lived in.  Client hired Farrell & Associates to represent Client at the preliminary hearing and trial.

RESULTS:

At the preliminary hearing, Farrell & Associates obtained a dismissal of the possession of heroin and possession with the intent to deliver heroin charges. The other charges were held for court. 

Farrell & Associates prepared to go to trial for Client’s remaining charges: possessing marijuana and possessing drug paraphernalia. After speaking with the prosecutor, the Commonwealth dismissed the remaining charges. All of the charges were expunged after Farrell & Associates filed a motion to do so.

 

JURY FINDS CLIENT NOT GUILTY OF RAPE OF CHILD AND OTHER SEX OFFENSES (DB00009210):

BACKGROUND:

After several years of custody dispute, Client’s child, on the insistence of the child’s mother, reported that her father (Client) brutally raped her years before.   Client hired Farrell & Associates to represent him for trial. Client was charged with rape of a child, incest, statutory sexual assault, endangering the welfare of children, and corruption of minors. Farrell & Associates proceeded to take Client’s case to a jury trial.  At the jury trial, the Commonwealth presented the testimony of the Victim (the jury was told that the Victim’s testimony, alone, is sufficient to convict Client), an expert to explain the late reporting of the crime, Victim’s friend who said that Victim told her about the assault a few months after it occurred, and a police officer who had interviewed Client.  The Client did not testify, but members of his family testified that when the Victim stayed at Client’s house, she did not make the screams that she said she did.  There was also testimony from others that there was a custody dispute.

RESULTS:

After a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty at all counts. Farrell & Associates proceeded to expunge all of the charges from Client’s record. Client was extremely pleased with the disposition. 

 

CLIENT FACING LIFE IMPRISONMENT FOUND GUILTY OF VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER (TT00010117):

BACKGROUND:

Client stabbed the Victim in the chest on camera and fled.  The Victim died as a result of the stab wounds.  Client was charged with Criminal Homicide. Farrell & Associates represented Client at his jury trial. 

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates argued that Client’s actions were a result of an imperfect self-defense (voluntary manslaughter) and was not murder. The jury agreed and returned a guilty verdict of Voluntary Manslaughter. Client received seven and one half (7½) to fifteen (15) years of incarceration.  Client was pleased with the result. 

 

DUI CHARGES WITHDRAWN AFTER EVIDENCE SUPPRESSED (PC00010123):

BACKGROUND:

Client while driving home after drinking was stopped for speeding.  The police conducted field sobriety tests and concluded Client was intoxicated.  Client’s blood alcohol results were over .20%.  Client was inevitably charged with DUI (2 counts) and speeding. Farrell & Associates were retained to represent Client for his trial. Farrell & Associates filed pre-trial motions to suppress evidence based upon the argument that the police did not have probable cause to stop Client’s vehicle.  The argument was that the officer was improperly using the speed-timing device and the officer had no probable cause to believe Client was speeding. 

RESULTS:

The Court agreed with Farrell & Associate’s argument and granted the motion to suppress the evidence. Once the evidence was suppressed, the Commonwealth was forced to withdraw the charges.  Client was very pleased with the results.  

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF CRIMINAL MISCHIEF AND CRIMINAL TRESPASS (JW00007133):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with criminal mischief and criminal trespass.  Client hired Farrell & Associates.  Client went to trial.

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates obtained a not guilty verdict on all counts.  The charges have been expunged from Client’s criminal record.

 

ROBBERY, POSSESSION OF FIREARM BY MINOR, AND CONSPIRACY CHARGES DISMISSED (ES00007107):

BACKGROUND:

Client, at age 17, was charged as an adult with robbery, robbery of a motor vehicle, possession of a firearm by a minor, criminal conspiracy to commit robbery, and possession of marijuana.  The facts were that the Victim was robbed at gunpoint by a group of individuals.  The victim’s money, car and other property was stolen by the robbers.  Less than two (2) hours later, after a high-speed chase, the police stopped the stolen vehicle that was occupied by three (3) individuals including Client.  An assault rifle was found in the front of the car and Client, who was in the backseat, was found to have marijuana in his possession.  Farrell & Associates represented Client at a preliminary hearing.  Thereafter, Farrell & Associates requested that Client’s case be transferred to the Juvenile Division and that the charges of robbery, robbery of motor vehicle and   criminal conspiracy be dismissed because the Victim could not identify Client as one of the robbers.  

RESULTS:

The charges of robbery, robbery of a motor vehicle, possession of a firearm by a minor, and criminal conspiracy to commit robbery were dismissed by the Court. The charge of possession of marijuana (small amount) was transferred to juvenile court where the charge was eventually resolved and expunged from Client’s juvenile record.  As to Client’s adult record, all of the charges have been expunged.

 

PCRA PETITION GRANTED AND CLIENT RECEIEVED NEW SENTENCE (WP000136):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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

 

CLIENT AVOIDS SENTENCE OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT (CL000010157):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates were privately retained after several attorneys refused to take the case because the Commonwealth would not negotiate a plea deal.  

Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates, chose to go to trial. 

RESULTS:

After a trial, Client was found guilty of third-degree murder, robbery, burglary, possession of a firearm and criminal conspiracy.  Farrell & Associates 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 AVOIDS SENTENCE OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT (LD00010222):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates represented Client. Farrell & Associates 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. 

RESULTS:

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. 

 

FLEEING AND ELUDING CHARGE DISMISSED (LL00007309):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates was hired to represent Client.  Farrell & Associates filed pre-trial motions to suppress the evidence flowing from the illegal traffic stop. Farrell & Associates negotiated with the Commonwealth to obtain a favorable plea bargain.

RESULTS:

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 FOUND NOT GUILTY OF ARSON AND RISKING CATASTROPHE (DB00008137):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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

 

KIDNAPPING, ROBBERY, AND SEX OFFENSES DISMISSED (KC00011238):

BACKGROUND:

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

Persuaded by Farrell & Associates 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. 

RESULTS:

The District Attorney concurred with Farrell & Associates’ 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.

 

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CHARGES DISMISSED (KZ00012134):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates was hired to represent Client.  After review, Farrell & Associates discussed with the District Attorney about the circumstances behind the charges and explained how there were problems in proving their case. 

RESULTS:

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

 

CLIENT FOUND NOT GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT (RK00012163):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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

 

CHARGE OF POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DELIVER PLEAD DOWN TO SUMMARY CITATION (TC00012190): 

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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 FOUND NOT GUILTY OF HOMICIDE (DT00012200):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates for his jury trial.  Farrell & Associates 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.

RESULTS:

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

 

JUVENILE CHARGED WITH ROBBERY AND CONSPIRACY RECEIVES CONSENT DECREE (BM00011203):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates 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 & Associates 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.  

RESULTS:

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 FOUND NOT GUILTY OF LURING, CORRUPTION OF MINORS, AND STALKING (DA00012246):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged with luring child into a motor vehicle, corruption of minors, stalking, and harassment. Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates 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 & Associates 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 & Associates subpoenaed all of the reports in the matter.

Minutes before the trial, the police reports were given to Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates 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.

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates successfully got a not guilty verdict for all counts against Client. Farrell & Associates 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. 

 

ROBBERY CHARGE GETS WITHDRAWN (GP00012198):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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. 

 

JUVENILE CHARGED WITH CRIMINAL ATTEMPT HOMICIDE RECEIVES FAVORABLE SENTENCE (MD00012254):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates represented Client.  Farrell & Associates 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. 

RESULTS:

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.

 

JUVENILE TRIAL:

 

JUVENILE CLIENT CHARGED WITH THREAT TO USE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION RECEIVES CONSENT DECREE (RM00011227):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates 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. 

RESULTS:

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

 

JUVENILE CLIENT CHARGED WITH RAPE RECEIVES CONSENT DECREE (MF00011166):

BACKGROUND:

Client was charged by juvenile petition of rape and indecent assault of a younger family member.  Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates convinced the Office of the District Attorney to give Client a consent decree.

RESULTS:

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.

 

APPEALS:

 

CLIENT CONVICTED OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT RECEIVES A REDUCED SENTENCE (BB00099124):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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.  

 

APPELLATE COURTS AFFIRM CLIENT’S SUCCESSFUL PRETRIAL MOTONS (EH00099124)

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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

 

APPELLATE COURTS AFFIRM DISMISSAL BASED UPON VIOLATION OF CLIENT’S SPEEDY TRIAL RIGHTS (CC00000183):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates were contacted by the trial attorney to assist in the appeal.  

RESULTS:

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

 

CLIENT RECEIVES REDUCTION IN SENTENCE AFTER APPELLATE COURTS VACATED FELONIES (FF00002127):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates in order to effectuate an appeal to the Superior Court.   On appeal, Farrell & Associates argued that the Commonwealth failed to prove the charge of felony unlawful acquisition because there was no fraud or misrepresentation.

RESULTS:

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.

 

COMMONWEALTH COURT AGREES THAT CLIENT’S DRIVER’S LICENSE SHOULD NOT BE SUSPENDED (CR00006103):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates.

RESULTS:

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

 

POST-CONVICTION:

 

CLIENT CONVICTED OF ROBBERY OF A MOTOR VEHICLE AND AGGRAVATED ASSAULT ON A POLICE OFFICER IS AWARDED A NEW SENTENCE AND RECEIVES REDUCTION IN SENTENCE (NP00006124):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates. Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates 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.

RESULTS:

The post-conviction court agreed with Farrell & Associates’ 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 & Associates 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 SENTENCED TO LIFE FOR MURDER RECEIVES NEW TRIAL AND SENTENCE REDUCED TO FIVE YEARS (RY00099102)

BACKGROUND:

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.

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates 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 SUCCESSFULLY WITHDRAWS GUILTY PLEA AND RECEIVES REDUCTION IN SENTENCE (CM00099105):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS: Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates 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.

 

SUPREME COURT GRANTS CLIENT SENTENCED TO LIFE A NEW TRIAL (RM00099126):

BACKGROUND:

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.    

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates represented Client after Client lost his post-conviction appeal in the Superior Court.  Farrell & Associates convinced the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to accept the appeal.  The Supreme Court agreed with Farrell & Associates’ 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 & Associates 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.

 

CLIENT CONVICTED OF RAPE RECEIVES NEW TRIAL AND GETS A REDUCTION IN SENTENCE (JN00099138):

BACKGROUND:

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.  

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates 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 & Associates 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.

 

CLIENT CONVICTED OF SEX CRIMES IS GRANTED A NEW TRIAL AND RECEIVES PROBATION INSTEAD OF PRISON (MR00099154):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates to file a post-conviction petition.  

RESULTS:

Farrell & Associates 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 CONVICTED OF SEX CRIMES IS GRANTED A NEW SENTENCING AND RECEIVES A REDUCED SENTENCE (DC000990158):

BACKGROUND:

Client pleaded guilty to numerous sexual offenses and received an extensive sentence.  Farrell & Associates 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.  

RESULTS:

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

 

CLIENT CONVICTED OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT GETS POST-SENTENCE MOTIONS REINSTATED AND RECEIVES REDUCTION OF SENTENCE (SM00000191):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates 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.

RESULTS:

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 & Associates filed a motion to release Client.  Client served approximately fourteen months of incarceration before he was released.  

 

CLIENT CONVICTED OF NUMEROUS SEX CRIMES RECEIVES A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN SENTENCE (MW00001171):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates 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.  

RESULTS:

Upon strong urging by Farrell & Associates, 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 CONVICTED OF ROBBERY AND AGGRAVATED ASSAULT RECEIVES REDUCTION IN SENTENCE (ES00012114):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates 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.

RESULTS:

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.

 

PRELIMINARY HEARINGS:

 

CLIENT CHARGED WITH AGGRAVATED ASSAULT RECEIVES SUMMARIES (SP00001101):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates were hired to try to resolve the case at the preliminary hearing.

RESULTS:

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 CHARGED WITH POSSESSION OF HEROIN HAS CHARGES DISMISSED (PG000196):

BACKGROUND:

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.  

RESULTS:

After argument by Farrell & Associates, the court dismissed the charges.

 

CLIENT CHARGED WITH POSSESSION A WEAPON ON SCHOOL PROPERTY RECEIVES SUMMARY (MP00002118):

BACKGROUND:

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 & Associates represented Client at the preliminary hearing.

RESULTS:

Upon urging by Farrell & Associates, 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 & Associates 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 CHARGED WITH AGGRAVATED ASSAULT GETS CHARGES DISMISSED (HC00002162):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

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

 

CLIENT INVESTIGATED FOR RAPE NEVER HAS CHARGES FILED (WJ00007281):

BACKGROUND:

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

RESULTS:

After Farrell & Associates 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.