Successful Outcomes in Difficult Cases

Our client was arrested for Driving While Impaired.  After being taken downtown, he registered a .09 on the Intoximeter.  At trial, we highlighted the discrepancies in the officer’s testimony and the margin of error in breath testing machines such as the EC-IR II.  The judge found the State did not prove our client’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt and found our client Not Guilty.  

After crashing his car into the car in front of him and performing poorly on standardized field sobriety testing, our client was charged with Driving While Impaired. Subsequent blood alcohol testing revealed a .10 Breath Alcohol Concentration. At trial, we established through cross-examination that after waiting for about an hour for the police to arrive, our client walked across the street and had a beer at a restaurant. After arguing the .10 BAC result was not within “a relevant time after driving” as required by North Carolina law, the Judge found our client Not Guilty.

Our client was charged Felony Possession with Intent to Sell and Deliver Cocaine and Felony Possession with Intent to Sell and Deliver Marijuana after the search of our client’s work truck yielded cocaine and marijuana. Through our investigation, we learned several co-workers used the same work truck, some of whom were known to use the same drugs that were found. After raising issues with the State’s chain of custody and a couple of days before our trial was scheduled to start, the State dismissed all charges.

After weaving within his lane on a highway, our client was pulled over and subsequently performed poorly on standardized field sobriety testing. After being taken downtown, our client blew a .09 on the Intoximeter, and was charged with Driving While Impaired. At the suppression hearing, we challenged the stop of our client’s vehicle arguing there was a lack of reasonable and articulable suspicion of a violation of the law, and that our client’s driving was normal driving behavior. Our motion to suppress evidence was granted and the case was dismissed.

After having a few drinks at a restaurant, our future client drove through a DWI checkpoint. According to the state trooper, our client had an odor of alcohol and he failed standardized field sobriety tests. Breath alcohol tests indicated a .09 BAC. Our client was found guilty in District Court with a different attorney. The Frickey Law Firm was subsequently retained on appeal in Superior Court. At the Superior Court suppression hearing, we showed that the administration of the field sobriety tests were not administered in a standardized manner, and that our client’s driving, speech and overall presentation were normal. The Court found that the Trooper lacked probable cause to arrest our client. Case dismissed.

After weaving within his lane on a highway, our client was pulled over and subsequently performed poorly on standardized field sobriety testing. After being taken downtown, our client blew a .09 on the Intoximeter, and was charged with Driving While Impaired. At the suppression hearing, we challenged the stop of our client’s vehicle arguing there was a lack of reasonable and articulable suspicion of a violation of the law, and that our client’s driving was normal driving behavior. Our motion to suppress evidence was granted and the case was dismissed.

After having a few drinks at a restaurant, our future client drove through a DWI checkpoint. According to the state trooper, our client had an odor of alcohol and he failed standardized field sobriety tests. Breath alcohol tests indicated a .09 BAC. The client was found guilty in district court with a different attorney. The Frickey Law Firm was subsequently retained on appeal in Superior Court. At the superior court suppression hearing, we showed that the administration of the field sobriety tests were not administered in a standardized manner, and that our client’s driving, speech and overall presentation were normal. The Court found that the Trooper lacked probable cause to arrest our client. Case dismissed.

Our client was charged with Felony Possession of Weapon of Mass Destruction for an alleged short-barrel rifle, Felony Possession with Intent to Sell and Deliver Cocaine and Felony Possession with Intent to Sell and Deliver Marijuana. After carefully examining the firearm, we retained a firearms expert who opined that the firearm had the requisite barrel length, and therefore, was not subject to federal restrictions — resulting in the dismissal of the serious weapon charge. We later filed several motions with the Court, including motions to suppress evidence for entering our client’s home without a warrant and for destruction of evidence by law enforcement. A few days before the case was set to be heard, the State offered a single count of misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia. Our client was sentenced to one day in jail that he had already served.

After law enforcement searched our client’s vehicle, our client was charged with Felony Possession of Heroin and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. Our client was already on probation who stood to have her suspended sentence activated, in addition to going to jail for these new charges. Attorney Frickey filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that she was immune from prosecution under a recently enacted but ambiguous statute. After reviewing the motion, the State offered not to revoke her probation and to dismiss her new charges in exchange for drug treatment. After successfully completing treatment, our client’s case was dismissed – avoiding a jail sentence for the new charge and the case for which she was on probation.

Our client was charged with Felony Perjury stemming from untruthful statements made by our client during a recorded family law hearing. Despite our client not having a criminal record, the State would only extend a felony plea offer. We took the case to trial arguing to the jury that our client’s statements were not material, and there were conflicts of interest in the family law hearing. Despite having a District Court judge as the State’s star witness and the recording of the untruthful statements played to the jury, the jury asked about jury nullification and indicated that it probably could not reach a unanimous verdict. After a conference with the prosecutor, our client was finally offered a misdemeanor with probation – saving his career and freedom.

Our client was pulled over after running a fresh red light. According to the police officer, our client exhibited six of six clues on the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Test, five of eight clues on the Walk and Turn Test, refused a portable breath test, and had a ½ gallon open bottle of liquor in the passenger area. Blood Alcohol tests showed a .15 BAC. Our client was convicted in District Court with a different attorney. In Superior Court, Attorney Frickey took the case to trial. We elicited from the arresting officer that the blood specimens were not stored in a refrigerated locker as required. In addition, we argued that original blood analyst should have testified instead of a surrogate analyst — resulting in a hung jury and mistrial. Case pending.

Our client who was already on Felony probation was charged with Trafficking Methamphetamine, Felony Possession of Cocaine, and Misdemeanor Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.   After reviewing the discovery and results of a gas chromatograph, we convinced the State to dismiss the felony charges, and to not revoke his existing probation.