Assault/Battery Charges
Charges: Battery on a Person 65 Years or Older
Case Number: 2015CF000224AXX
Facts: The client of the firm was charged with battery on a person 65 years or older when the alleged victim, a neighbor, called the police and told them that he was punched in the face after a verbal altercation with their client. The client was identified from a photo lineup.
Results: The Rudman Law Group was able to locate a video recording of the incident captured by one of their client’s friends. In the video, it was clear that the alleged victim was the initial aggressor, and that it was one of their client’s friends, and not their client, who struck the man. They brought this to the attention of the state, who then immediately abandoned prosecution by filing a “no file.”
Charges: 4 Counts of Attempted First-Degree Murder With a Firearm, 2 Counts of Discharging a Firearm from a Vehicle, 3 Counts of Felon in Possession of a Firearm, 1 Count of Shooting into a Building
Case Number: 2013CF002909AXX
Facts: The client of The Rudman Law Group was in prison on other charges when his cellmate lit him on fire. Upon his release, their client allegedly located this cellmate to seek revenge. Their client allegedly drove by his house on four separate occasions and shot at him every time. There were many witnesses, including the client’s ex-girlfriend, who were allegedly in the vehicle. As a result of his actions and his criminal record, the client was facing a minimum mandatory sentence of life in prison as to four counts of attempted first-degree murder with a firearm, 15 years minimum mandatory as to three other counts, and three years minimum mandatory as to another three other counts.
Results: The firm visited their client in jail where he was being held without bond. They began the investigation and realized there were more than 50 witnesses listed by the state. They intended to depose all of them and hire a private investigator to look into the alleged victim. However, their client was unable to afford such an intense pretrial investigation. Therefore, the firm requested the court find him indigent for costs that then allowed the government to pay for the depositions and investigation. Their order was granted and they set multiple depositions.
The state’s first offer was 20 years, which their client immediately rejected. They were able to present credible witnesses to help their client’s case. As a result, the state dropped the offer to 10 years, knowing that their client faced mandatory life in prison on four different counts were he to be convicted after trial. Although they considered this a fair offer, the client still declined it. He told them he could only take five. The Rudman Law Group kept fighting and finally negotiated with the state to offer five years, even though their client would have been sentenced to life if the jury found him guilty on just one of the four counts of attempted murder. They tirelessly pursued the result their client wanted.
Charges: Sexual Battery on a Helpless Person
Case Number: 2014CF010190AXX
Facts: The firm’s client, the alleged victim, and some friends were out drinking and ended up sleeping at their client’s house. The alleged victim’s friend woke up in the middle of the night and claimed that their client was having intercourse with the alleged victim while she was asleep. This witness left the house, and called the police. When the police arrived, the alleged victim told them that she had no recollection of what happened and that she would not allow the client to have sex with her because they are just friends and have never been together. However, the alleged victim then told another detective that they’ve had sexual relations in the past, contradicting her previous statement.
Results: The client informed the firm that he and the alleged victim had an ongoing relationship for some time now. He was able to pull pictures from his old email, showing him and the alleged victim on a romantic getaway together, including a picture of the boarding passes for a cruise that he and the alleged victim took. They presented the state with this information, and pointed out that the alleged victim had already contradicted herself to the police. Any type of pleading to a sexual battery would mean that the client would become a sex offender for life. Therefore the firm pleaded for the state to let them take a deposition of the alleged victim. At the deposition the alleged victim deferred to the state and agreed to revise the charge to felony battery and a withhold of adjudication, meaning their client would not become a convicted felon or a sex offender. In the end, The Rudman Law Group were able to keep their client out of prison, avoid a felony conviction, and avoid him from being a registered sex offender.
Charges: Battery on a Person 65 Years or Older
Case Number: 2013CF002932AXXX
Facts: It was alleged that The Rudman Law Group‘s client was highly intoxicated when he came home and struck his 85 year old mother multiple times. The probable cause affidavit alleges that the client even choked and kicked his mother while she was on the ground.
Results: Although initially the state’s offer required their client do jail time, the firm was able to negotiate for their client to receive treatment. They successfully argued for probation in lieu of jail time as long as their client underwent a substance abuse and mental health evaluation with recommended treatment, to solve the underlying problem. They were able to get a withhold of adjudication that also allows their client, once off probation, to seal his record.
Charge: Battery in a County Jail
Case Number: 2014CF013142AXX
Facts: The Rudman Law Group‘s client was charged with striking another inmate in the county jail. It was alleged that the entire incident was captured on jailhouse surveillance video. Based on his record, the state sought to have the client declared a habitual violent offender and increase the maximum penalty from five years to 10 years in prison. The state presented no other offer in this case but to simply state that they wanted him to do the maximum penalty allowable by law.
Results: The firm immediately began to sort through the evidence and discovered the alleged “victim” was a convicted kidnapper and murderer who has severe psychological issues and was currently under prosecution by the state for numerous counts of weapons possession in the jailhouse. They argued their client was the victim of repeated threats of violence that was met with inaction by the supervising jailhouse guards. Due to their aggressive defense, the state offered their client the opportunity to resolve his case to the 447 days he had already served, substantially less than the state’s original offer.
Charge: Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon
Case Number: 2013CF006664AXX
Facts: The client was charged with attempting to run down the alleged victim with his car after a confrontation at a local convenience store.
Results: The Rudman Law Group began to uncover inconsistencies and a complete lack of candor and credibility on behalf of the alleged victim. As a direct result, they were able to successfully negotiate with the state to dismiss all charges against their client upon successful completion of 10 hours of community service.
Charge: Aggravated Battery
Case Number: 2013CF010931AXX
Facts: The firm’s client, while exiting a bar, was approached, accosted and attacked by a rather large, drunken man. It was alleged that their client struck first and punched this male, knocking him to the ground. The friends of the alleged victim claimed that while unconscious on the ground, their client continued to kick him. The police arrived and believed the alleged victim’s story, since it was supported by the alleged victim’s girlfriend. As a result, their client was charged with aggravated battery.
Results: It was The Rudman Law Group‘s position that their client acted with the sole intention of defending himself from serious bodily injury or death, when their client kicked the alleged victim. They filed a motion for prosecutorial immunity (or in common terms, a stand your ground motion) and argued that their client was well within his rights in defending his life. After vigorous negotiations, the state dismissed the felony charge in exchange for a plea of guilty as to a misdemeanor battery charge. The state also agreed to withhold adjudication, meaning that the client can seal his record.
Charges: Robbery by Sudden Snatching, Battery on a Law Enforcement Officer, Criminal Mischief
Case Number: 2014CF011903AXX
Facts: The firm’s client was approached by a security officer in his neighborhood for violating association rules by power-washing his driveway past the allowable time of 4:00 P.M. on a Sunday. The client acknowledged this warning, however, he was almost done so he proceeded to finish up the last remaining patch of his driveway. The security guard then, without permission, pursued their client onto his property and shoved a phone in their client’s face, yelling that he had captured it all on video. It was then alleged that their client then took the phone from the security guard and threw it into a bucket of water, thus destroying the phone.
Results: The Rudman Law Group strenuously argued that the security guard acted outside of his rules of operation by moving beyond an “observe and report” role and pursuing their client onto his property. Additionally, the client had an absolute right to forcibly eject a trespasser and to use a reasonable amount of force to do so. After extensive legal arguments, the team at The Rudman Law Group was able to negotiate with the state to abandon prosecution and enter a “nolle prosse,” meaning that their client can expunge his record.
