Many of my successes are attributable to clients who had the courage to persevere in the face of enormous governmental power. Below are recent examples of successful representations in the public record:
- The Ninth Circuit completely reversed my client's mail fraud and conspiracy convictions based on an overbroad theory of prosecution and insufficient jury instructions.
No. 21-50162, 98 F.4th 935 (9th Cir. 2024) - In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of my client's motion to dismiss under the Double Jeopardy Clause and ordered dismissal with prejudice of a 110-count indictment charging conspiracy, defrauding the FAA and NTSB, obstruction, wire fraud, aircraft parts fraud, and FAA registration violations.
No. 22-10139, 2023 WL 7297332 (9th Cir. 2023) - Hired after my client had been convicted on more than 30 counts of conspiracy, wire fraud, and money laundering, secured Rule 29 relief and alternatively a new trial on all counts and then persuaded the Solicitor General to dismiss the government's appeal of the district court's ruling, resulting in a complete acquittal.
No. 22-10353 (9th Cir. 2023); 2022 WL 17729383, 2022 WL 3699527, 2022 WL 2103063 (D. Guam 2022) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s sentence based on Sentencing Guidelines errors, resulting in a seven-year sentencing reduction on remand.
No. 20-50192, 2021 WL 4891991 (9th Cir. 2021) - Based on venue defects, the Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s conviction and 30-year sentence for conspiring to deal in surface to air missiles.
No. 19-50278, 993 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 2021) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s weapons conviction and five-year sentence based on the improper denial of a continuance so that he could exercise his Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice.
No. 18-50146, 803 Fed. Appx. 140 (9th Cir. 2020) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s sentence based on Sentencing Guidelines error related to the amount of loss in a mortgage fraud case.
No. 18-50241, 820 Fed. Appx. 544 (9th Cir. 2020) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s money laundering and drug conspiracy convictions, which had resulted in a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The government ultimately agreed to resolve the case so that my client would be released within approximately five years.
No. 17-10191, 784 Fed. Appx. 485 (9th Cir. 2019) - Based on the strength of my opening brief on appeal, the government agreed that my client’s weapons conviction and 41-month sentence had to be reversed. On remand, the government agreed to a resolution for probation.
No. 17-50203 (9th Cir. 2019) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s sentence based on a “grouping” error under the Sentencing Guidelines, resulting in a significant reduction at his resentencing.
No. 17-50330, 769 Fed. Appx. 419 (9th Cir. 2019) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s convictions, which included RICO and Hobbs Act violations, and his 16-year sentence. The court agreed with my argument that the jury was incorrectly given an Allen charge.
No. 14-50434, 727 Fed. Appx. 432 (9th Cir. 2018) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s most serious conviction based on a Confrontation Clause violation resulting from the use of video-conference testimony.
No. 16-50271, 907 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2018) - The California Court of Appeal agreed with my argument that the jury instructions in a products liability case were defective, thereby entitling my client to a new trial.
No. G052182, 2017 WL 1880964 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) - Based on the strength of my opening brief, the government conceded that my client’s most serious conviction had to be reversed and agreed to a post-appeal resolution resulting in a six-year sentencing reduction on remand.
No. 16-50022 (9th Cir. 2017) - The Ninth Circuit reversed my client’s convictions, which included murder and RICO violations, and his resulting sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, sustaining my argument that the cumulative effect of Confrontation Clause, Miranda, and jury instruction errors required a new trial.
No. 15-50158, 720 Fed. Appx. 846 (9th Cir. 2017)