Case Results
A Few Examples of Ramón's Stellar Work
STATE v. T.B. – Felony Obstruction of an Officer
T.B. was accused of physically assaulting officers as they attempted to serve a fugitive warrant on another person at the residence. Despite two police officers testifying that T.B. caused bodily injury to the arresting officer, Ramón convinced the jury to acquit T.B.
T.B. went home after the trial with no probation and no criminal conviction.
It’s important to note that T.B.’s co-defendant, represented by a different attorney, entered a plea before trial and received extensive jail time followed by probation.
· Not Guilty After a Jury Trial ·
STATE v. E.S. – DUI (above .08)
E.S. was captured running a red light on video and was immediately pulled over and arrested for DUI. E.S. admitted to drinking at a bar, exhibited slow speech, and showed signs of impairment on field sobriety tests given by the officer.
After being arrested, E.S. submitted to the state’s breath test and blew over the limit. Prior to trial, Ramón successfully argued the suppression of the breath test result. With the breath test suppressed, Ramón discredited the arresting officer using the officer’s own video and report and won the case for his client.
As a result, there was no DUI conviction or loss of license for E.S.
· Not Guilty After a Jury Trial ·
STATE v. K.B. – Aggravated Assault and Battery
K.B. was caught on video severely beating a fellow classmate in his high school lunchroom. The victim was sent to the hospital for surgery as a result of his injuries.
Arguing self-defense, Ramón convinced the jury that K.B. was the actual victim and that he attacked the other student to protect himself.
Prior to trial, the prosecutor asked that K.B. be sentenced to more than five years in prison. After being acquitted, K.B. walked out of the courtroom with no jail time and no conviction on his record.
· Not Guilty After a Jury Trial ·
STATE v. C.Q. – DUI (client admitted drinking eight beers)
Police found C.Q. and his truck stuck in a muddy field behind an elementary school. Officers testified at trial that C.Q. couldn’t walk straight and was unsteady on his feet. C.Q. also showed other physical signs of impairment and admitted to the officers he had consumed eight beers.
On cross-examination Ramón was able to show that the officers failed to conduct an extensive DUI investigation and jumped to conclusions on C.Q.’s sobriety.
Ramón convinced the jury that there was just too much doubt in the case and they acquitted C.Q., saving C.Q.’s driver’s license and career.
