Case Results

Stepfather was accused of Rape and GSI by stepdaughter shortly after wife/mother filed for divorce. Despite the timing of the allegations, the Stepfather was indicted on 6 counts of Rape and 6 counts of GSI alleging sexual abuse 2 years prior. At trial, Andrew elicited over 150 “I don’t know” responses from the alleged victim during cross-examination. The phrase “I don’t know” was the ringing mantra of Andrew’s closing argument. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on all charges after only 30 minutes of deliberation.

College athlete accused of rape at a party. Through investigation and negotiation, I was able to prevent charges from being filed and got the athlete reinstated on the team.

After attending an Ohio University social mixer, a male student accompanied a female student back to her dorm where they had sex. The day after the party, the female student could not remember details from the prior evening. She claimed to have been blacked out and too intoxicated to have consented to sex. Andrew conducted a thorough investigation. Video was obtained that showed the female student walking unaided through her dorm foyer. Andrew’s rigorous cross-examination of the accuser established that she was capable of sending text messages and making videos after the male student left. Further, she admitted during cross-examination that she supplied the condom used that night. The University Title IX Board found the male student NOT to be in violation of the Sexual Assault Code of Student Conduct.

Client was charged with murder due to the child’s fractured skull and massive brain hemorrhage. The state’s theory was client struck the child with a baseball bat. Through the reconstruction of events and the use of a defense expert, I could show that injuries resulted from a fall.

Client was accused of forcing his way into a house. Ultimately, I was able to demonstrate that the alleged victim was lying in an effort to cover up her illegal activity.

Client found in possession of a large amount of marijuana after his vehicle was stopped. Client was facing over 6 years in prison and the case was ultimately dismissed.

Client was accused of being under the influence of narcotics. Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) was successfully challenged.

Neighbor called police as a result of hearing arguing. The wife was “pressured” into pursuing charges by the officer, and as a result, the case was dismissed.

Caretaker was charged with failure to properly supervise a child who accidentally died. He received an 18-month sentence with probation.

Young man who was brand new to the job was accused of failing to perform his duties at a group home for mentally challenged individuals. After we presented evidence that the training supervisor failed to properly and completely train the client on how to do the job, the case was dismissed.

A male student at Ohio University was accused of sexual assault after meeting a female student at a campus bar and walking her to her dorm. Andrew’s thorough investigation of both stories provided him with the detailed information necessary to prepare his Client to testify and effectively respond to cross-examination. The University Title IX Board found the male student NOT to be in violation of the Sexual Assault Code of Student Conduct.

Two students at Ohio University engaged in a casual sexual relationship for about a year. Two years after the relationship ended the female found out that the Client had “cheated” on her during the time they were involved. After learning of the infidelity, the female pressed charges of sexual assault. Andrew’s knowledge of the parameters of “consent” combined with a detailed inspection of the accounts of what happened furnished Andrew with the foundation for effective cross-examination. The University Title IX Board found the male student NOT to be in violation of the Sexual Assault Code of Student Conduct. Andrew’s negotiations with the felony prosecutor resulted in no criminal charges for his Client.

Grandfather of six was facing life without parole due to charges alleging rape of his nine-year-old granddaughter. An investigation of the case revealed that the mother of the alleged victim had previously made a false allegation of her own. At trial, evidence was presented that the mother of the alleged victim had estranged herself from the family. The mother claimed she suffered mental abuse and financial ruin at the hands of her parents. During cross-examination of the granddaughter, it was shown that she was making claims at the insistence of her mother. The cross-examination combined with the testimony of the Client’s other grandchildren led to a Not Guilty verdict.

A group of friends went to Ohio University to attend a concert and visit siblings. The group spent the night in a large dorm suite. The Client mutually shared a twin bed with one of the female friends. Two years later, the 23-year-old female “remembered” that she had been sexually assaulted the night after the concert by Client. The prosecutor initially believed the female and was inclined to file Rape charges. Andrew conducted a thorough investigation including interviewing everyone who was with the two that night at the concert or who slept in the suite. After protracted negotiations with the prosecutor’s office, no charges were filed against the Client.

A young college student was stopped for speeding on Stimpson Ave. The Ohio State Patrol Officer administered field sobriety tests and placed the Client under arrest. The Client agreed to take a breath test and “blew” a .16. In reviewing the OSP video tape of field sobriety tests, Andrew found that the Trooper had unfairly graded the Client. Andrew was able to negotiate a reduced charge based on his client’s performance on the field sobriety tests.

Client was charged with OVI on the basis of being under influence of narcotics. The Officer who made the traffic stop was a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) and the OVI charge was based solely on the Officer’s opinion as a DRE. Andrew’s cross-examination of the Officer at a suppression hearing revealed that the Officer’s opinion’s were based on flawed assumptions. The case was dismissed.

Son (Client) was in town visiting his mother and her boyfriend. After dinner Client’s mother and her boyfriend began to argue. The Client got involved and tried to diffuse the argument, but this only irritated the boyfriend. The boyfriend was asked to leave and reluctantly did so. However, once on the porch, the Boyfriend began to yell and make threats. The Client (son) went outside to tell him to leave the porch and go home. At that point, the boyfriend turned and began to aggressively move toward the Client. The client discharged his handgun multiple times, hitting the boyfriend three times. Client was arrested and charged with Attempted Murder and Felonious Assault. In working with the Client and witnesses, Andrew was able to recreate the events and demonstrate the that Client was acting in self-defense. The prosecutor dismissed the charges prior to trial.

Client and best friend returned home from a night of drinking and began to play “fake Russian Roulette.” Unfortunately, Client was unaware that the handgun was actually loaded and he shot his best friend in the head. Miraculously, the victim survived. Client was a graduate student who had a bright future ahead of him. After extensive negotiations, Andrew was able to secure the Client diversion, providing him with the opportunity to have a successful and rewarding future.

Client and girlfriend were driving an ATV on country roads when a man (who was an off-duty officer) appeared on the road and held up his hand instructing them to stop. The Client and his girlfriend were told to exit the ATV. Unsure exactly who had stopped them or why, the Client exited the vehicle. At that point, his girlfriend became agitated and combative and got into a verbal argument with the off-duty officer. The client intervened and got into a scuffle that resulted in both falling into barbed wire. The officer was seriously injured. The client was charged with 1st-degree Felonious Assault on a police officer. The client was facing a mandatory 5 years and the loss of his professional license. In the end, the case was resolved as a misdemeanor and the client retained his license.

This high-profile case involved the killing of two teenagers. The case was initially investigated but became a “cold case.” Several years later a witness came forward and implicated two men in the murders. Both men were charged with two counts of Capital Murder. One of them plead guilty. The other indicted man, Andrew’s Client, denied any involvement in the murders. He was insistent that he was not involved, even though he was implicated by the man who pled guilty. Andrew’s thorough review of the physical evidence led to the discovery of missing or hidden key evidence. This fact, along with a careful discreditation of the alleged accomplice, led prosecutors to offer Andrew’s client time served on two misdemeanors, which he took.

An obnoxious and intoxicated neighbor was yelling and screaming while riding a bike in front of an apartment complex late at night. Client went to ask him to be quite and go home. Something transpired between the two and the man fell from his bike fatally hitting his head on the curb. The State claimed that the Client charged at the victim and punched him causing him to fall from his bike. As a result, the Client was charged with Murder and the case proceeded to trial. At trial, Andrew was able to establish that his Client did not strike the victim and it was more likely that the victim’s blood-alcohol level caused the fall. The client was found not guilty of Murder.

Boyfriend (Client) and girlfriend returned home after a night out. A physical argument ensued. In the morning the Client awoke to find his girlfriend unresponsive. An autopsy revealed the cause of death to be manual strangulation. The client was accused of manually strangling his girlfriend to death and charged with Murder. At trial, Andrew argued self-defense. Through the use of defense witnesses, Andrew was able to establish that the victim had a long history of violent behavior when drunk, including previous attacks on the Client and others. Combining this testimony with that of the forensic pathologist’s opinions regarding alcohol-related asphyxiation led the jury to find the Client not guilty of murder, but guilty of manslaughter for not seeking immediate medical assistance.

Mother of a 4-year-old boy went to work leaving the Client to watch her child. When she left, the child was playing outside in the backyard. After a while, the child came inside and said he had fallen and laid down. A few hours later the child became groggy and eventually non-responsive. 911 was called and the child was taken to the hospital where he was found to have a fractured skull and massive brain hemorrhage. The State’s theory was that the Client struck the child with a baseball bat or physically abused him in some way. Through the reconstruction of events and the use of a defense expert, Andrew was able to show that the injuries were most likely the result of a fall from the tall swing set in the backyard. The Murder charges were dismissed before trial.