To all our current and prospective clients: In light of the National Emergency, our office will still be operational from either our office or remotely depending on the status of events. Either way, we still answer all of our calls directly 24/7. The best way to get a hold of us would be through our office number (951) 686-4818 or email (kia@kialaw.com). Our day-to-day operations depend on the safety of our staff and the courts being open for business. Feel free to reach out to us to inquire about your case or discuss any new cases with Mr. Feyzjou at the number above. Stay safe and we remain hopeful that this too shall pass with everyone’s health and safety in mind.

DUI charges dismissed on day of trial 02/25/13. Client pleads to reckless driving

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE COURT RECORDS DISMISSING THE DUI CHARGES ON 02/25/13

On November 20, 2012, our client Pedro was detained for a DUI investigation. On January 10, 2013, the Riverside District Attorney’s Office filed criminal charges against Pedro alleging violations that he violated California Vehicle Codes 23152(a) and 23152(b).

On January 14, 2013, our office appeared on his case and entered a plea of not guilty to the charges. Our client had a right to force the prosecutor to announce ready for trial within 45 days of the date of the arraignment. That is exactly what we did. We set the case for trial immediately upon arraignment and did not waive time.

Once the matter was set for trial, this forced the prosecutor to get all of their witnesses and evidence in order within 45 days.

On February 25, 2013, we appeared for jury trial in this matter ready to demonstrate to the jury that our client was innocent. However, prior to commencing with jury selection, our client asked that we submit an offer to the prosecutor to determine if they will accept what is commonly referred to as a “dry reckless”.

One of the lesser offenses is a “dry reckless” driving charge under Vehicle Code 23103.

A “dry reckless” is simply a misdemeanor defined as driving with a flagrant disregard for people or property. A “dry” is always better than a “wet” reckless – as the “wet” refers to an alcohol or drug related drug offense. A “dry” reckless has advantages over a California DUI, including,

  1. No DUI school
  2. No mandatory sentencing enhancements for repeat offenders
  3. No automatic increase for each subsequent conviction
  4. Reduced fines
  5. In Pedro’s case, no jail sentence or requirement to do community service.
  6. A dry reckless driving conviction will not typically lead to a cancellation of your policy or cause the insurance premium to increase significantly as it would with a DUI type of conviction

 

At KIA LAW FIRM, our firm focuses on obtaining the best result for the Client.

As you can see, we have obtained dismissals and better offers on cases we have set for trial because we constantly challenge the State’s evidence and force the prosecution to “prove up” their case.

At KIA LAW FIRM, we always provide a free consultation. Call 951.686.4818 with any questions. We take cases all throughout Southern California

 

Drunk driving charges dismissed on February 4, 2013

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE DISMISSAL OF THE DRUNK DRIVING CHARGES

Luis approached our office with concerns that he had a bench warrant for failing to appear in Court and address a drunk driving charge from several years back.

While many criminal defense attorneys would have just recalled the arrest warrant and pled the client to a Misdemeanor conviction for drunk driving, our office filed a Motion to Dismiss the Charges in violation of the Defendant’s constitutional rights.

On February 4, 2013, a Judge of the Riverside Superior Court agreed with our position and ruled in our favor, dismissing the charges against Luis.

With this dismissal, Luis avoids mandatory DUI classes, a $2500.00 fine, and a loss of his driving privileges.

At Kia Law Firm, we take pride in providing the best legal services possible. If you have any legal questions, contact our office.

Not Guilty Verdict on 11/13/12 (Resisting Arrest Trial)

CLICK HERE TO SEE NOT GUILTY VERDICT

When I first met my client, he indicated to me that he didn’t think he should have been arrested for his conduct. On day one, when we heard his story, we believed in his innocence.

On September 27, 2012, we appeared in court and pled “not guilty” and set the matter for trial. Our last day to start trial was November 13, 2012. This was a case where we gave no “time-waivers” on the case. Essentially, this means that we put the pressure on the District Attorney to be prepared for trial within 45 days of our initial arraignment date of September 27, 2012.

On October 18, 2012, I appeared in court and confirmed our trial date of November 5, 2012.

On November 7, 2012, we started trial in this case.

As you can see from the attached Case Report, we presented evidence on behalf of the client, cross-examined the police officer and provided a reasonable explanation as far as our client’s conduct was concerned.

From the beginning, we always felt that the Police Officer was aggressive, unreasonable and failed to perform his duties to that of a reasonable police officer in the same or similar circumstances.

The jury agreed with our assessment.

On November 13, 2012, the Jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on the alleged violation of Penal Code 148.

You see, just because an Officer arrests you doesn’t mean you’re guilty. Just because the District Attorney charges you with a crime doesn’t mean you’re guilty. Guilt is determined by the trier of fact – that is 12 people in your community.

If you have any questions regarding your legal matter, feel free to contact our office for an evaluation.

Motion to Vacate 1992 Felony Plea Granted Case Dismissed

This case is from about 2 years ago, however, we realized that there are many people out there with very similar situations as our client, Francisco. As you will note, we never disclose case numbers or the last names of our clients to comply with privacy requirements. However, we can advise you that our client FRANCISCO was facing deportation for a plea of guilty to a very serious felony charge from many years ago (about 19 years ago).

In any event, our office reviewed the old prior felony conviction and based on our investigation, we determined that our client would be able to file a MOTION TO VACATE THE FELONY CONVICTION.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW OUR MOTION TO VACATE THE PRIOR FELONY CONVICTION

The court reviewed our motion and considered all of the facts that we raised. The great news is that the COURT MADE THE RIGHT CALL and granted the motion to vacate the client’s felony conviction.

As a result, the CLIENT was ultimately able to dismiss the ENTIRE CASE and remain in this country free of any immigration consequences.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE COURT’S RULING WHICH GRANTED THE MOTION TO DISMISS

DUI Charges Dismissed on 10/30/12 Reduced to a Speeding Ticket

Our client Kelley contacted us from out of state and advised us that she had a warrant for her arrest based on her failure to appear in court on her June 2010 DUI charges. Her bail was set at $75,000.00.

On September 20, 2012, we appeared on her behalf at the San Bernardino Superior Court and recalled her warrant. We were also able to make sure that she didn’t need to post bail. She was released on her written promise to appear.

During the course of our defense, we determined that due to certain facts that we became aware of, we would be able to file a Motion to Dismiss the charges.

As such, we filed a motion and served a copy on the San Bernardino District Attorney’s Office. See the link below for a copy of the document. As you will note, the yellow highlighted portion would indicate that this was filed 15 days prior to the date our case was eventually dismissed.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE FIRST PAGE OF OUR MOTION TO DISMISS

On October 30, 2012, approximately two weeks after the District Attorney’s case received the Motion to Dismiss, the matter resolved.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE DISMISSAL OF THE MISDEMEANOR DUI CHARGES

The District Attorney agreed to dismiss the 2 misdemeanor charges and instead allow our client to plead guilty to infractions and pay a fine.

This means that the client has NO PRIOR DUI CONVICTION, NO MISDEMEANOR ON HER RECORD, NO LOSS OF HER DRIVING PRIVILEGES, NO REQUIREMENT TO ATTEND A DUI PROGRAM, NO INCREASED INSURANCE RATES BECAUSE OF A PRIOR DUI and SHE IS HAPPY.

Aggressive representation is what drives our attorneys at KIA LAW FIRM. We believe in quality over quantity. If you have any questions regarding a new case or you would like a second opinion on your existing case, please feel free to contact us at (855) 662-2723.

October 2012. Client is Charged with HS 11359 Possession of Marijuana for Sale. Case Dismissed.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE COURT DISMISSAL OF THE CASE

This is the story about Randolph who was falsely accused of possessing Marijuana for sale. When Randolph and I first met, he explained to me that all of the things that the officers had found were not possessed for purposes of selling Marijuana. We conducted a brief investigation and determined that our client was truthful.

With that said, we took on the case. We made several appearances and conducted intense investigation into the police practices, evidence seized and obtained documentary evidence consistent with our client telling the truth.

Our client was offered 32 months in State Prison. We rejected that offer.

We announced ready for the Preliminary Hearing and before we even started the hearing, the District Attorney realized that they had a weak case and dismissed the charges against our client.

What do we learn from a case like this? An officer can arrest an individual based on probable cause. The filing deputy at the District Attorney’s Office can file a Complaint against a Defendant on the theory that there is sufficient evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

However, with a confident well-prepared attorney, cases can be dismissed. We have included a minute order showing the results of our work and the dismissal.

If you have any questions about your case, we always offer a free consultation. Feel free to contact us at (951) 686-4818 for more information.

Accessibility Tools