Recent Successes:
MARCH 11, 2008: TRIAL VICTORY! Today Judge
Thorbourne dismissed an attempted robbery charge
against our client after he found there was not enough
proof offered by the District Attorney to sustain the
petition. The minor had maintained his innocence all the
time since his arrest, including to investigating police
officers.
JANUARY 10, 2008: Today, on the date set for trial, the
District Attorney and Judge agreed to reduce our client's
plea to a non-strike after extensive negotiations regarding
the minor and his culpability and need for rehabilitation.
The court and DA finally agreed that the minor's
background and circumstances did not merit a 'strike'
prior on his record.
AUGUST 16, 2007: Today the Sacramento County
District Attorney dismissed robbery charges against our
client on the day of trial, admitting that they had
'insufficient evidence' to try the minor. Our client went
home that afternoon.
AUGUST 10, 2007: TRIAL VICTORY! Today Judge
Peterson dismissed the gun possession charge against
our client after a contested jurisdictional hearing. The
court found that there was not proof beyond a reasonable
doubt to sustain the charge against our client and that
'mere presence' was not sufficient for sustaining a this
charge.
JULY 24, 2007: Today the District Attorney dismissed a
robbery charge against our client after examining all the
evidence, including the fact that one of his own witnesses
was possibly the real culprit. Our client had denied the
allegations consistently since his arrest, and was clearly a
victim of 'mistaken identity.'
MARCH 27, 2007 DISMISSAL: Today the court
dismissed all drug-related charges against our client after
we demanded that alleged drugs found on our client be
tested by a competent laboratory and not solely by the
police officer's 'field test' (which alleged the substance to
be methamphetamine). The lab results showed the
substance to be something else.
OCTOBER 27, 2006 DISMISSAL: Today Judge Keller
dismissed a charge against our client in El Dorado
County Superior Court. The District Attorney admitted she
did not have enough evidence to try the minor. Our
investigation determined that the minor was the true victim
of an assault last year and that the so-called victim was
actually the aggressor. Our client's version of events was
backed up by several witnesses.
Newspaper Articles:
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13112460p-1395693
7c.html
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13118307p-1396269
0c.html
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13387037p-1422858
0c.html
(Requires Registration)
Thorbourne dismissed an attempted robbery charge
against our client after he found there was not enough
proof offered by the District Attorney to sustain the
petition. The minor had maintained his innocence all the
time since his arrest, including to investigating police
officers.
JANUARY 10, 2008: Today, on the date set for trial, the
District Attorney and Judge agreed to reduce our client's
plea to a non-strike after extensive negotiations regarding
the minor and his culpability and need for rehabilitation.
The court and DA finally agreed that the minor's
background and circumstances did not merit a 'strike'
prior on his record.
AUGUST 16, 2007: Today the Sacramento County
District Attorney dismissed robbery charges against our
client on the day of trial, admitting that they had
'insufficient evidence' to try the minor. Our client went
home that afternoon.
AUGUST 10, 2007: TRIAL VICTORY! Today Judge
Peterson dismissed the gun possession charge against
our client after a contested jurisdictional hearing. The
court found that there was not proof beyond a reasonable
doubt to sustain the charge against our client and that
'mere presence' was not sufficient for sustaining a this
charge.
JULY 24, 2007: Today the District Attorney dismissed a
robbery charge against our client after examining all the
evidence, including the fact that one of his own witnesses
was possibly the real culprit. Our client had denied the
allegations consistently since his arrest, and was clearly a
victim of 'mistaken identity.'
MARCH 27, 2007 DISMISSAL: Today the court
dismissed all drug-related charges against our client after
we demanded that alleged drugs found on our client be
tested by a competent laboratory and not solely by the
police officer's 'field test' (which alleged the substance to
be methamphetamine). The lab results showed the
substance to be something else.
OCTOBER 27, 2006 DISMISSAL: Today Judge Keller
dismissed a charge against our client in El Dorado
County Superior Court. The District Attorney admitted she
did not have enough evidence to try the minor. Our
investigation determined that the minor was the true victim
of an assault last year and that the so-called victim was
actually the aggressor. Our client's version of events was
backed up by several witnesses.
Newspaper Articles:
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13112460p-1395693
7c.html
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13118307p-1396269
0c.html
http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/13387037p-1422858
0c.html
(Requires Registration)
| "Representing Juveniles in Sacramento and El Dorado Counties since 1995" |
CONTACT US:
(916) 363-1211 PHONE
(916) 363-1213 FAX
Or, email us at:
markm62@sbcglobal.net
Office Location:
9608 Kiefer Blvd.
Suite One- B
(916) 363-1211 PHONE
(916) 363-1213 FAX
Or, email us at:
markm62@sbcglobal.net
Office Location:
9608 Kiefer Blvd.
Suite One- B
DISCLAIMER: The juvenile crime, juvenile criminal defense, juvenile
rights, juvenile tried as an adult, juvenile criminal defense, juvenile serious felony,
juvenile expulsion hearing, or other juvenile legal defense information presented at
this site should not be regarded as specific legal advice nor does it create a legally
binding attorney-client relationship. The Law Office of Mark S. Mayfield web site is
not intended to offer legal advice. Further, our practice is limited to the Sacramento,
Amador, Placer, Yolo, El Dorado, and San Joaquin County divisions of the Superior
Court of the State of California, including the communities of Antelope, Arden,
Arden Oaks, Arden Park, Auburn, Cameron Park, Camino, Carmichael, Citrus Heights,
Cosumnes, Davis, Del Paso Heights, El Dorado, El Dorado Hills, Elk Grove, Fair Oaks,
Florin, Folsom, Franklin, Freeport, Fruitridge, Galt, Gold River, Granite Bay,
Greenhaven, Hagginwood, Ione, Jackson, Lake Hills Estates, Laguna West, Lincoln,
Locke, Loomis, Meadowview, Natoma, Natomas, Newcastle, Nimbus, North
Highlands, North Sacramento, Oak Park, Orangevale, Penryn, Placerville, Pocket
Area, Rancho Cordova, Rancho Murieta, Rescue, Rio Linda, Rocklin, Rosemont,
Roseville, Sacramento, Shingle Springs, Sloughhouse, Smithflat, Sutter Creek,
Thornton, Walnut Grove, West Sacramento and Woodland. There is no express or
implied intent to solicit business from outside of Northern California. Nothing herein is
intended to constitute a guarantee, warranty or prediction regarding the outcome of
any prior or pending legal matter. In fact, every case is different and outcomes will
vary depending upon the actual facts and legal issues of a case.
rights, juvenile tried as an adult, juvenile criminal defense, juvenile serious felony,
juvenile expulsion hearing, or other juvenile legal defense information presented at
this site should not be regarded as specific legal advice nor does it create a legally
binding attorney-client relationship. The Law Office of Mark S. Mayfield web site is
not intended to offer legal advice. Further, our practice is limited to the Sacramento,
Amador, Placer, Yolo, El Dorado, and San Joaquin County divisions of the Superior
Court of the State of California, including the communities of Antelope, Arden,
Arden Oaks, Arden Park, Auburn, Cameron Park, Camino, Carmichael, Citrus Heights,
Cosumnes, Davis, Del Paso Heights, El Dorado, El Dorado Hills, Elk Grove, Fair Oaks,
Florin, Folsom, Franklin, Freeport, Fruitridge, Galt, Gold River, Granite Bay,
Greenhaven, Hagginwood, Ione, Jackson, Lake Hills Estates, Laguna West, Lincoln,
Locke, Loomis, Meadowview, Natoma, Natomas, Newcastle, Nimbus, North
Highlands, North Sacramento, Oak Park, Orangevale, Penryn, Placerville, Pocket
Area, Rancho Cordova, Rancho Murieta, Rescue, Rio Linda, Rocklin, Rosemont,
Roseville, Sacramento, Shingle Springs, Sloughhouse, Smithflat, Sutter Creek,
Thornton, Walnut Grove, West Sacramento and Woodland. There is no express or
implied intent to solicit business from outside of Northern California. Nothing herein is
intended to constitute a guarantee, warranty or prediction regarding the outcome of
any prior or pending legal matter. In fact, every case is different and outcomes will
vary depending upon the actual facts and legal issues of a case.
Law Office of Mark S. Mayfield- Juvenile Law Attorney
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |