NORWALK– Client charged with 5 counts of Attempted Murder and facing life without the possibility of parole. The district attorney’s office made no offer on the case. After several witnesses testified for the prosecution, Ms. Dodson won a “not guilty” verdict on all five counts and client was released from custody.
SAN FERNANDO– Client was charged with battery and facing a year in jail as well as loss of his nursing license. Although several witnesses were ready to testify for the prosecution, including a security guard, Ms. Dodson convinced the city attorney that they were lying to law enforcement. After thoroughly interviewing defense witnesses and presenting their statements to the city attorney, Ms. Dodson got the case dismissed. During the court hearing for dismissal, the city attorney complimented Ms. Dodson on the record and stated how it was Ms. Dodson’s work on the case that allowed justice to be served.
VAN NUYS– Client was arrested and jailed for domestic violence. Although the police eventually released her uncharged, the record of her arrest remained. Most arrest records are confidential. It is the record of conviction that the public can access easily. Some jobs, however, require finger printing and signing a consent for the potential employer to obtain the record from the Department of Justice. Such was a job Ms. Dodson’s client wanted to obtain, so she hired Ms. Dodson to file a petition to seal and destroy her arrest record. Having tried to get it sealed on her own, she was denied such relief and that is why she hired Ms. Dodson to help her. Ms. Dodson filed an extensive petition to get the arrest record sealed. It is a petition that is rarely granted. Trials have an easier burden of proof to win. At trial, the accused has to prove that a reasonable doubt of his or her guilt exists. To win a petition to seal and destroy an arrest record, the accused must prove that he or she is factually innocent of the charge for which the arrest occurred. The judge made a finding of factual innocence, granted the petition, and Ms. Dodson’s client was able to get the job she wanted.
VAN NUYS– Client was accused of petty theft, or shoplifting, as a misdemeanor. She was arrested at the 99 cent store. Having never committed a crime in her life, she was distraught at the idea of her record reflecting a criminal conviction. In fact, the notion of showing up in person for court gave her panic attacks. Ms. Dodson appeared for her and convinced the prosecutor to dismiss the case. Her client never had to appear in court or suffer a criminal conviction.
BURBANK– Client was arrested for stealing DVD’s. He was applying to medical school and could not suffer a conviction on his record. Ms. Dodson managed to convince the prosecutor to dismiss the case after he completed a theft-impulse control course.
GLENDALE– Client was arrested and charged with petty theft for leaving the store with items and failing to pay for them. She had never been convicted or arrested before and was also distraught. Ms. Dodson appeared on her behalf and presented evidence of her fragile, psychological state. With a doctor’s letter listing the medications she was prescribed, Ms. Dodson managed to convince the prosecutor that the theft could have been unintentional. The prosecutor allowed her to receive an infraction (which is minor compared to a misdemeanor). Infractions also do not require the accused to plea in open court, and Ms. Dodson can accept the infraction without the accused being required to make an appearance.
GLENDALE– Client was arrested and charged with petty theft as a prior. She had eight other petty theft convictions on her record. Ms. Dodson conducted several interviews with her client and her client’s psychologist. At the arraignment, the judge recognized Ms. Dodson’s client from her last case and exclaimed, “YOU! I told you if I ever saw you in my court again, I would send you to jail.” Ms. Dodson requested a sidebar and explained to the judge that her client had a diseased mind, not a criminal mind. After presenting the judge with evidence of her client’s mental afflictions, the judge allowed Ms. Dodson’s client to plead to a misdemeanor and serve a community service sentence.
VAN NUYS– Client was arrested and charged with Grand Theft Auto. He was accused of selling a stolen car to another person who was caught driving the stolen car. There were several witnesses and a lot of paperwork confirming Ms. Dodson’s client was the person who sold her the car. Ms. Dodson managed to get the case dismissed by a 995 motion to dismiss that argued Ms. Dodson’s client had no reason to know the car was stolen.
LAX– Client was arrested for embezzlement of over $80,000 of computer equipment. He worked for a company as a computer technician and was caught selling parts he was supposed to have installed on his company’s computers on ebay. An audit of his ebay account revealed an extensive amount of equipment that his company had purchase orders and receipts proving the parts belonged to them. Ms. Dodson managed to convince the judge to allow him to plea to a misdemeanor with a partial restitution payment and complete payment to occur over his probationary period. Although he had a prior conviction for embezzlement, he served no jail time and never had to post bail for his case.
VAN NUYS– Client hired Ms. Dodson after receiving a ticket for running a red light at an intersection that had a camera which took his picture. Ms. Dodson’s client was a driver who would lose his job if convicted. After objecting to the affidavit filled out by her client’s employer as hearsay, Ms. Dodson managed to convince the judge that the picture did not resemble her client well enough to constitute proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Result: Not Guilty.
SANTA CLARITA– Client was arrested and charged with residential burglary. Neighbors witnessed the break-in and immediately called police. He was caught during the burglary in the victim’s home by law enforcement. Several electronics had been moved and were ready to be loaded when officers arrived on the scene. The district attorney felt he had an open and shut case and offered two years in state prison. No negotiation was possible and the district attorney even told Ms. Dodson that it was county policy to give two years for all residential burglaries. Therefore, Ms. Dodson filed a sentencing memorandum asking the judge for a better disposition. Ms. Dodson’s client received a probationary sentence.
VAN NUYS– Client was arrested and charged with domestic violence. Ms. Dodson convinced the prosecutor that the “alleged victim” was actually the one who attacked the accused and the case was dismissed. Since her client was still threatened by the “alleged victim,” Ms. Dodson filed a civil restraining order to protect her client. At the hearing, the “alleged victim” testified against Ms. Dodson’s client, but Ms. Dodson’s cross-examination of this witness resulted in the judge issuing a permanent restraining order in favor of Ms. Dodson’s client, awarding custody of the couple’s child to Ms. Dodson’s client, and ordering the “alleged victim” to pay child support.
BURBANK– Client was arrested and charged with felony domestic violence. The alleged victim had a black eye that police photographed. After hiring Ms. Dodson, the client had no charges filed against him. The victim filed a civil restraining order against Ms. Dodson’s client. Ms. Dodson appeared at a hearing where she cross-examined the alleged victim and conducted direct testimony of her client. The judge determined that no restraining order was necessary and denied the alleged victim’s petition.
VAN NUYS– Client was arrested and charged with domestic violence. The alleged victim was ready to testify and pushed hard for a conviction. Furthermore, Ms. Dodson’s client and the alleged victim had a son in common who also wanted to testify against Ms. Dodson’s client and was encouraging prosecutors to proceed with their case. Ms. Dodson’s client had a high-security job and would lose it if he suffered a conviction of domestic violence on his record. After interviewing defense witnesses and lengthy negotiations with the prosecutors, Ms. Dodson’s client was allowed to plea to a charge of disturbing the peace and served no jail time.
SANTA CLARITA– Client was charged with Criminal Threats as a felony, a strike offense, Battery with Injury on a Police Officer, Resisting a Peace Officer Causing Serious Bodily, and Resisting an Executive Officer. Client was facing a possible sentence of ten years in state prison and incurring a strike on his record. After several court dates and intense plea negotiations with the district attorney, Ms. Dodson managed get the strike offense reduced to a misdemeanor, so her client will have no strike on his record. Furthermore, two charges were dismissed and her client was sentenced to a mere 90 days in the county jail. The district attorney also agreed to have the remaining felony reduced to a misdemeanor after 18 months.
VAN NUYS EAST– In a chance meeting, Ms. Dodson encountered one of her former clients while she was in court on another matter. This client was about to appear as a defendant in a restraining order hearing. He was nervous and scared that he would have a restraining order issued against him and suffer the stigma of having that on his civil record. The alleged victim was present and ready to testify, as well as the alleged victim’s witnesses. Although Ms. Dodson would have preferred to have more time to prepare, she appeared for her client at his insistence. After Ms. Dodson conducted cross-examination of the alleged victim and her witnesses, and direct examination of her client, the judge determined that no restraining order was necessary, and denied the alleged victim’s petition.
VAN NUYS– Client was accused of violating a protective order that was in place after he suffered a conviction for domestic violence when he had another lawyer. He was on probation at the time for domestic violence, so the probation violation was also a problem. Violating a protective order on its own is a tricky charge to defend, since it requires no intent to violate it, or even harm to occur to the victim. In fact, a protected person can initiate the contact and the accused can still be convicted. The offer was 365 days in jail. Ms. Dodson’s client was not a citizen and faced suffering an immigration hold and deportation if sent to jail. Ms. Dodson presented several witness statements to the city attorney that outlined several mitigating factors. The city attorney allowed Ms. Dodson’s client to complete community service instead of jail. At sentencing, the city attorney wanted to ensure that Ms. Dodson’s client understood the seriousness of no future violations and stated on the record, “If it were not for the excellent work of your attorney, you would be going to jail today.”
SAN FERNANDO– Client hired Ms. Dodson during the investigatory phase of assault with a deadly weapon. She was accused of assaulting the alleged victim with a knife. Ms. Dodson spoke with police and convinced them to not arrest and charge her client. Client was still in fear for her life from the alleged victim. Ms. Dodson and her client spoke with police and prosecutors and the alleged victim was arrested for domestic violence. After bailing out, the “alleged victim” continued to harass Ms. Dodson’s client. Ms. Dodson presented the evidence of this continued harassment to prosecutors. At the next court hearing, the prosecutor managed to convince the judge to remand the defendant into custody and Ms. Dodson’s client was safe and no longer in fear for her life.
VAN NUYS– Client hired Ms. Dodson after getting a letter from the City Attorney’s Office informing him that he had a warrant for his arrest issued against him a year ago. Ms. Dodson appeared in court with her client and he remained free on his own recognizance (without having to pay bail).
BURBANK– Client hired Ms. Dodson after allowing three years to expire from the time of her probation violation occurred. She did not complete any of the community service she was ordered to do, or pay any of the fines she was assessed. She also did not appear at her court date and a warrant was issued against her. Ms. Dodson appeared at her side to recall the warrant. The judge stated that there was no way she was going to avoid jail time, but allowed her to remain out of custody. At her probation violation hearing, Ms. Dodson argued all the mitigating circumstances her client had encountered during the last three years. The judge reinstated her probation and did not require her to serve any time in jail or issue any additional punishment.
DOWNTOWN (CRIMINAL COURTS BUILDING)– Client hired Ms. Dodson 10 years after he absconded to Mexico on his open felony drug charges. The charges consisted of transportation and possession of 10 kilos of cocaine. Upon re-entering the United States, he was arrested. Ms. Dodson represented him at his preliminary hearing and the case against him was dismissed.
SAN FERNANDO– Client hired Ms. Dodson after she was terminated from her drug program for testing positive for methamphetamine the second time. She faced the imposition of a two year suspended state prison sentence. Ms. Dodson represented her at her probation violation hearing and the judge allowed her to attend an outpatient drug program and reinstated her probation on the same terms and conditions.
VAN NUYS– Ms. Dodson appeared at a probation violation hearing which involved her client, a drug offender, who had not completed any treatment he was supposed to complete getting arrested on a bench warrant. At the beginning of the hearing, the judge told Ms. Dodson that her client was remaining in custody, regardless of what she argued on his behalf. After Ms. Dodson finished her argument, the judge released Ms. Dodson’s client from custody and terminated his probation early.
LAX– Ms. Dodson appeared at a felony probation violation hearing. Her client was arrested for another count of domestic violence which involved the same victim that he was on felony probation for battering. At the end of a long hearing, Ms. Dodson’s client was being escorted by sheriffs back to his holding cell. Ms. Dodson, however, kept arguing. The judge politely continued to listen to Ms. Dodson’s arguments and eventually, ordered the sheriff to bring Ms. Dodson’s client back to the court room and released him from custody. Probation was reinstated on the same terms and conditions. On a side note, the sheriff who went back to get Ms. Dodson’s client from custody told Ms. Dodson’s client, “I don’t know what you’re paying your lawyer, but it’s not enough.”
SAN FERNANDO– Client was violated by his probation officer for never reporting for the last year and testing positive for marijuana use 10 times the prior year when he did report. Apparently, his prior probation officer allowed him to slide with positive tests, but after a new probation officer was assigned to his case, he violated him for all his positive tests and all his missed report dates. He faced the imposition of a state prison sentence. Ms. Dodson appeared at his probation violation hearing, and after effective cross-examination of two probation officers, managed to convince the judge to reinstate his probation on the same terms and conditions with an additional five days of
county jail to be served.
TORRANCE/LAX– Client was on felony probation for a highly publicized case involving rental fraud. Having a different lawyer at the time, he was found guilty of defrauding several people out of rental deposits and rent paid to him for a house he did not own or have the legal right to rent. There was a 2 year suspended state prison sentence in place. Ms. Dodson’s client failed to comply with the terms and conditions of probation and was arrested for a second DUI while using a fake driver’s license, a fake registration, and provided the arresting officers with the same fake name. To complicate matters, he had several thousands of dollars of cash on him, as well as marijuana. Ms. Dodson managed to get the marijuana charge dropped, and avoid all charges associated with use of the false name, false identification and false registration. Furthermore, she got the judge to sign a property release order that ordered police to return all his money and property that was confiscated. Still, the battle was getting the felony probation judge to not impose the suspended two year sentence Ms. Dodson’s client had from his prior case. After two hearings and a sentencing memorandum being filed and argued, Ms. Dodson’s client was sentenced to a sober living program and was released from custody the following week after the hearing.
LONG BEACH– Client hired Ms. Dodson after getting arrested during a routine traffic stop. He had been convicted for cultivation of marijuana and possession for sale of marijuana while represented by another lawyer over three years ago. During his prior sentencing, the judge sentenced him to two years in state prison, and allowed him one month to wrap up his affairs before requiring him to surrender himself to serve his state prison sentence. At the hearing, the judge warned him that if he did not surrender on the required date, he would impose the maximum sentence of six years in state prison. Instead of surrendering himself, he absconded and avoided detection for over three years. At the first hearing, the judge noted that he had warned the accused he would impose the maximum penalty, and it was still his intention to impose the six years he had stated earlier. Ms. Dodson requested another hearing date so she could present the court with a sentencing memorandum. The judge told Ms. Dodson that he would allow her to present the court with a memorandum, but there was nothing she could say that would convince him to not impose the six years. Ms. Dodson worked very hard interviewing witnesses and found a lot of mitigating factors regarding her client. At the next hearing, the judge decided that Ms. Dodson’s client had an exceptional case and sentenced him to the original two year sentence he was originally ordered to serve.
VAN NUYS– Client was arrested for Driving on a Suspended License as a misdemeanor. This charge is priorable and results in a mandatory jail sentence upon second arrest. Ms. Dodson convinced the city attorney to allow her client to plead to Driving Without a License as an infraction, so her client had to serve no probation or have a misdemeanor on his record.
INGLEWOOD JUVENILE– Client’s father hired Ms. Dodson after his child had been charged with several violations of his child’s probation. Client’s father pointed out to Ms. Dodson that most of his child’s problems stemmed from the lack of discipline and structure that existed in his ex-wife’s home. He wanted to have his son in his home. Ms. Dodson advised him that juvenile court was not the forum for changing custody, but told him she would do her best. In court, the judge informed Ms. Dodson that her client had too many violations and was going to be placed in custody. He also had a new accuser, his teacher had written the court a letter regarding a battery that her client had committed on him. Ms. Dodson argued that her client had no structure in his mother’s home and would do much better if placed with his father. The court stated that it would not entertain family law motions. Ms. Dodson, however, continued to argue for her client’s freedom. She also presented the court with evidence regarding the misconduct of her client’s teacher. At the end of the hearing, Ms. Dodson’s client was ordered to live with his father and was given another chance on probation. Ms. Dodson’s client’s teacher was eventually investigated and fired from his position as teacher at the school.
LANCASTER JUVENILE– Ms. Dodson’s client was charged with Battery on a Police Officer. Ms. Dodson argued for her client’s release at his detention hearing. He was released to his parents that day and allowed to participate in the DEJ (Deferred Entry of Judgment) program and received no criminal record from the case.
SYLMAR JUVENILE– Ms. Dodson’s client was charged with stealing a wallet and a laptop. Ms. Dodson managed to get her client admitted to the Deferred Entry of Judgment program and no criminal record resulted from the case.
SYLMAR JUVENILE– Ms. Dodson’s client was charged with Possession of Marijuana for Sale. He received DEJ and no criminal record from this case.
|
