Case Results

Criminal Defense Case Results

The following case results are just a few examples of how criminal attorney John Teakell has helped his clients.

Tax Evasion/Tax Fraud – Investigation closed. No charges/Indictment of the target of the investigation. (Northern District of Texas)

Extortion – Dismissal. Client dismissed for conspiracy to extort money and for communications with intent to extort monies. (Northern District of Texas)

Fraud – Dismissal/Diversion. Defrauding the U.S. Department of Agriculture (Northern District of Texas).

Money Laundering – No Indictment – Northern District of Texas, Lubbock Division, re R.G. & E.G. Money laundering allegation stemming from drug trafficking activities. Investigation closed as to these two individuals after defense presentations.

Bankruptcy Fraud – No Indictment – Southern District of Florida, re B.L. Bankruptcy fraud / aiding and abetting allegation / investigation. No charges after defense presentations to the agents/prosecution.

Mail Fraud – Pre-Trial Diversion. No Indictment Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, re T.P. Mail Fraud investigation re high-value coin sales. Agreement not to prosecute.

Mail/Wire Fraud – No Indictment Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re M.F. Mail fraud / wire fraud investigation concerning raising money for fraudulent investments. Client/target of the investigation was deemed to not be a target, but a witness, after discussions and presentations to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Case Results Additions 11-11-10

November 16th, 2010 by John R. Teakell

1. NO PROSECUTION – Embezzlement / Theft, Dallas, TX area, re AB. Client employee was investigated and accused of embezzling monies over a period of years by employer, and defense was able to negotiate a civil settlement prior to a criminal referral for prosecution. The matter was not referred for criminal prosecution.

2. DISMISSAL OF INDICTMENT – False Entry in Government Document, Dallas County, TX, re JM. Client was indicted on a false entry into a government document charge based upon an allegation that the client submitted a false name on a U.S. passport application. State had alleged that Client tried to obtain a false identity document by doing so. After submitting evidence to the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office of the fact that Client was christened with this name as a child, plus affidavits and other evidence showing no criminal intent by the client, the State dismissed the case.

3. NO REVOCATION – Burglary of Habitat, Denton County, TX, re JF. Client was on supervision for a burglary of a home (habitat) when Client was charged with a new criminal case in another county. After presentations and negotiations, the Denton County District Attorney’s Office agreed not to revoke the defendant Client but rather to slightly modify the probation supervision.

Posted in Recent Cases

Dismissals, No Bills, Declinations, etc. as of August/September 2010

September 23rd, 2010 by John R. Teakell

1.  CLOSED INVESTIGATION – Western District of Texas, re G.L., Insider Trading allegation on federal criminal referral. Client was considered an insider at a computer company and he was targeted due to his sale/exercising options on company stock. The defense made presentations as to transaction details and the public information about corporate executives selling stock and options, plus the client settled monetarily with the Securities and Exchange Commission. No criminal action was pursued thereafter.

2.  NO INDICTMENT – Mortgage Fraud allegation, Collin County, Texas District Attorney’s Office, re D. G.  Investigation into real estate loans and transactions lead investigators to client, who had provided insurance coverage on real estate that became the subject of investigations.  After presentations of defense evidence and information showing that the client did not have criminal intent to commit a crime when he insured properties for the targets, the District Attorney’s Office changed the client’s status from “target of the investigation” to that of “witness.”

3.  NO INDICTMENT/PROSECUTION DECLINED – Fraudulently Obtaining State Benefits, Parker County District Attorney’s Office, re K.C.  Investigation of client by Department of Health and Human Services agents focused on client’s applications for benefits from the State due to unemployment, special needs child, and other factors. After defense presentations, and settlement of monies with the State, the District Attorney’s Office agreed to decline charges.

4.  GRAND JURY NO BILL (REFUSAL TO INDICT) – Dallas County, Texas District Attorney’s Office, re J.M.  Client was the target of an investigation for aggravated perjury and tampering with a government document based upon allegations that she fraudulently used two (2) different names.  The defense presentation evidence included a birth certificate, a certificate of Christening when client was a baby, a polygraph examination, and affidavits, among other items.  The grand jury refused to indict (i.e., the grand jury refused to formally charge the client with criminal charges) based upon the defense information.  The defense information also revealed that the client took steps as directed by government employees when trying to obtain a legitimate passport.

5.  CLOSED INVESTIGATION / NO INDICTMENT – Southern District of Texas, Houston, re B.J. Mortgage fraud, bank fraud and mail fraud scheme investigation.  Client provided tax documents and signed documents for target of the fraud investigation that focused on false loan applications, identity theft, misuse of real estate and personal loan proceeds, and misuse of tax returns.  Presentations to the United States Attorney’s Office revealed that the client was a victim and further showed that the client had no criminal intent. Main target of the investigation was indicted and client was a potential witness.

6. NO CHARGES / NO REFERRAL TO THE PROSECUTION – Dallas County, Texas District Attorney’s Office/police department, re D.C.  Theft/Obtaining Funds by False Pretenses investigation wherein client was accused of accessing and spending monies without authorization.  Negotiations with the police detective allowed the parties to settle the dollar/restitution amount, wherein the detective agreed to close the matter and not refer it for prosecution.

7.  DISMISSAL OF INDICTMENT – Collin County, Texas District Attorney’s Office re C.C. for On-Line Solicitation of a Minor investigation and Indictment.  Client was indicted for soliciting a minor (underage female) on-line for a sexual purpose, after he had exchanged text messages and emails that turned to a topic of sexual nature.  After presentations and discussions with the Collin County District Attorney’s Office, including affidavits and a statement from the so-called victim, the State dismissed the case after realizing that the “victim” prompted the conversation and that the client had no intention of conversing about a sexual topic.

8.   WITHDRAWAL OF REVOCATION – Dallas County, Texas District Attorney’s Office re M.F.   State had filed a petition to revoke client’s probation for possession of controlled substances cases.  Client had been arrested and charged for new drug possession cases, but client was allowed to enter a pre-trial diversion program.  Since the client was not charged with the new cases but rather was allowed into the pre-trial diversion, and since client was complying with conditions of the pre-trial diversion, the State of Texas agreed not to revoke his probation and withdrew its petition to revoke.

9.    NO PROSECUTION – Collin County, Texas District Attorney’s Office re P.B.  Client was arrested for assault – family violence after a domestic incident, which was submitted to the Collin County District Attorney’s Office for prosecution as a case of assault bodily injury – family violence.  After obtaining an affidavit from the victim and making presentations to the District Attorney’s Office, the prosecution declined charges.

Posted in Recent Cases

Significant Cases Prosecuted April 15th, 2010 by John R. Teakell

Examples of Significant Cases
Prosecuted by John Teakell
 as Assistant United States Attorney

1. U.S. v. Walter H. Cushman III, et al. (ND-TX) This complex telemarketing and oil and gas fraud raised $10 million by selling interests in various oil and gas programs. The defendants made appearances of legitimately drilling for oil or gas by purchasing oil or gas leases that had little or no production potential. The defendants misrepresented the use of investor monies, production potentials and returns, and their expertise. Cushman contracted a person to either kill or break the legs of persons whom they feared would provide information to law enforcement. The defendants laundered money through houses of prostitution, utilizing shell companies and transfers of monies.

2. U.S. v. Ray Dell Devoll (ND-TX) Devoll was the first bank fraud defendant in the nation to advocate insanity at trial. Devoll orchestrated a devious and complex scheme to purchase and control a set of financial institutions utilizing those institutions’ own monies for the purchase(s). Devoll contacted institutions with offers to purchase the controlling interest of the respective institution, falsely claiming that a group of investors would finance the purchase(s). While negotiating with the respective institutions, Devoll attempted to obtain authority at the institutions in order to make unauthorized transactions. At one savings and loan, he obtained authority over functions that enabled him to transfer $2 million from its correspondent account at the Federal Reserve Bank. Devoll attempted to use the savings and loan’s own money to purchase its majority ownership.

3. U.S. v. Michael Satz, et al. (ND-TX) Satz orchestrated a fraudulent set of “boiler rooms” across the country that made misrepresentations to persons who were in desperate need of personal financing. His fraudulent companies promised that they would arrange/obtain financing for a “loan fee.” Satz sent money to a few people for the appearances of legitimacy, and he raised $12 million.

4. U.S. v. Norman Eads, et al. (ND-TX) Eads, the owner/manager of a fraudulent telemarketing “boiler room,” sold chances to win “top” prizes. The defendants induced victims to purchase allegedly state-of-the-art products at reduced prices. Eads, et al. misrepresented the product values, the existence of prizes, the chance of winning prizes, and the number of prizes. Eads raised more than $13 million.

5. U.S. v. Lorenzo Sigala, et al. (ND-TX) The Sigala brothers imported 250 kilograms of cocaine per month from Mexico. The cocaine was shipped through El Paso, Texas to the Dallas/Forth Worth area, where it was further distributed to other parts of the United States. The Sigala organization sent cash sales proceeds back to Mexico via couriers and semi-tractor/trailer trucks.

6. U.S. v. Linda McCanless (ND-TX) McCanless was convicted of solicitation of interstate murder-for-hire. McCanless was convicted of her solicitations to have her husband and sister killed, due to jealousy, hate and monetary considerations.

7. U.S. v. Jorge Alicea Serrano, et al. (Puerto Rico) Jorge Alicea Serrano was the largest mover of cocaine in and through Puerto Rico in the late 1980s through the mid-1990s. Alicea Serrano moved thousands of kilograms of cocaine, via his contacts in South America, to the States of Florida and New York. Alicea Serrano and others were convicted for activities in the mid-1990s with telephone calls that were taped pursuant to a Title III wiretap. Alicea Serrano, et al. couriered hundreds of thousands of dollars per trip to South America as payment for the cocaine, and to Caribbean countries for deposit.

8. U.S. v. Jaime Rosado Rosario, et al. (Puerto Rico) Rosado Rosario was a trafficker in huge quantities of cocaine through Puerto Rico to the United States. Rosado Rosario’s sources of cocaine were in South America, and Rosado Rosario, et al. transported thousands of cocaine kilograms to the mainland United States. During one conspiracy, two boatloads of kilograms were interdicted, and a member of the organization began to cooperate. After Rosado Rosario, et al. were indicted, Rosado Rosario had others kill the cooperating defendant, who was scheduled to testify at the cocaine trafficking trial. Rosado Rosario, et al. were further indicted for tampering with a government witness by murder.

9. U.S. v. Luis Gines Perez, et al. (Puerto Rico) Luis Gines Perez and others trafficked in heroin and cocaine in Puerto Rico and laundered sales proceeds in Puerto Rico and foreign countries. Gines and his organization lieutenant murdered an organization employee, who transported heroin and cocaine and who wire transferred money to launder sales proceeds. This case was certified by the Attorney General to seek death as a sentence.

10. U.S. v. Edilberto Perez Manjarres, et al. (Puerto Rico) Perez Manjarres and other Colombian nationals attempted to import over 1,100 kilograms of cocaine via boat from Colombia into Puerto Rico for further distribution. When the U.S. Coast Guard boarded the defendants’ vessel miles offshore, no controlled substances were on board. The next day, relatively near where the vessel had been stopped, the U.S. Coast Guard found 36 bales containing over 1,100 kilograms of cocaine.

11. U.S. v. Hernan Perez Perez (Puerto Rico) Perez Perez was a stockbroker who embezzled approximately $3 million from his securities firm. Perez Perez was able to perpetuate the scheme by transferring monies between clients’ accounts to conceal the embezzlements and by utilizing false account statements.

12. U.S. v. Eladio Santiago Sanchez, et al. (Puerto Rico) Santiago Sanchez, other employees, and supervisors of the Department of Veterans Affairs were convicted of extorting monies from veterans and falsifying records of that agency. The veteran benefits counselors and supervisors extorted money from veterans for whom they created eligibility for benefits. The defendants demanded and took one-half of the check amounts in cash from the veterans.

13. U.S. v. Ruben Caicedo Bustamante, et al. (Puerto Rico) Bustamante, et al. attempted to import 660 kilograms of cocaine from South America.

14. Unindicted matter (Puerto Rico) Complex money laundering/cocaine and marijuana trafficking between the mainland United States and Puerto Rico.

15. U.S. v. Acosta-Martinez, et al. (Puerto Rico)  Kidnapping-for-ransom and murder case in which the defendants murdered and dismembered the victim, and threatened witnesses for suspected cooperation. This case was certified by the Attorney General to seek death as a sentence.

II. Complex Issues and Other Matters

A. Prosecution related experience

1.  From 1990 to 1993 I was designated as a “FIRREA” (Financial Institution Reform and Recovery Act) prosecutor, exclusively prosecuting financial institution crimes.

2.  I was a member of the Department of Justice’s Working Group for fraud cases at the Department’s Office of Legal Education in 1997.

3.  I have taught several times at the Attorney General’s Advocacy Institute (National Advocacy Center), instructing there as a “group leader” teaching the realistic application of rules of evidence and conducting courtroom-setting exercises.

B. Legal issues examples

1.  First bank fraud case in nation wherein the defendant advocated insanity at trial.

2.  First indictment of violation of federal agency orders.

3. First indictment in a full-fledged investigation and prosecution of adulteration of food products (milk) pursuant to Title 21, United States Code, Sections 331 and 333.

4.  Several death penalty eligible cases, and two cases certified for seeking death.

5.  I have successfully admitted into evidence, prior statements of a murdered witness, under the revised Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure rule that allows hearsay, if the witness is unavailable and the defendant(s) caused the unavailability.

6.  Constitutional question regarding the applicability of the federal death penalty in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

C. Leadership and mentoring

1. In the Northern District of Texas, and especially in the District of Puerto Rico, I was assigned to instruct new Assistant U.S. Attorneys and assist them in prosecutions, and to evaluate their case preparation and advocacy.

2. I was designated as a mentor for the junior Assistant United States Attorneys in the District of Puerto Rico. The mentor program is designed to have a mentor available to provide advice about indictments, the use of certain statutes, procedures in hearings and trials, etc.

3. I was the Office of Professional Responsibility contact in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Puerto Rico. I functioned at times as the head of the Misdemeanor Division in the district attorney’s office. As a bank officer, I supervised two to three trainees at a time who were detailed to the Loan Review division.

4. In early 1997, I was selected to be the Assistant Director in the Office of Legal Education for criminal programs.

III. Civil Enforcement Litigation

The following enforcement actions are examples of the type of civil cases that I litigated as a Trial Attorney for the Securities and Exchange Commission:

1.  SEC v. Digital Lightwave, Inc., MD-FL, involved an earnings management scheme, that is, a fraudulent scheme to wrongfully recognize revenue to inflate the company’s earnings and thus its stock value.

2.  SEC v. Internet Capital Holdings, Inc., et al., SD-FL, involved a fraudulent scheme to raise monies by representing that it was an “Internet incubator” that held equities in various Internet/high technology companies. The defendants claimed that these companies were going public (to soon be traded on the stock market) and thus would increase the investment in Internet Capital Holdings.

3.  In re W.R. Grace Company, Inc. defendants, SEC Administrative Proceeding, Washington, D.C., wherein the defendants created reserves in one of Grace’s subsidiary companies, utilizing the reserves to manage its earnings and thus affect the value of the company stock.

4.  SEC v. Medical Research Industries, Inc., SD-FL, wherein the defendants fraudulently touted purported medical industry-breakthrough cures for various illnesses and concerns, and raised $52 million via several private placement memorandum offerings.

5.  SEC v. Physicians Guardian, Inc., et al., MD-FL, involved fraud in the offer and sale of unregistered securities in the form of undivided interests in an investment trust, which was allegedly purchasing a medical malpractice insurance company. The defendants misrepresented a variety of points about the insurance company, including its viability, financial condition, and engagements and contracts.

6.  SEC v. Christopher Hanna, SD-FL, in which a stockbroker engaged in an unauthorized trades/embezzlement scheme regarding clients’ funds at a stock brokerage, by transferring monies to South American and Caribbean accounts and laundering monies by a series of further transfers. Hanna utilized fictitious account statements to conceal the scheme, and as a further cover, engaged in unauthorized trades to generate profits to return a portion of embezzled funds to clients’ accounts.

7.  SEC v. Americash-Inc.com, Inc., et al., SD-FL, defendants raised approximately two million dollars in five months by misrepresenting that investments would fund “payday advance” loans. The corporate defendants and the principal are enjoined from fraudulent offerings or sales of securities, and their assets are frozen pending accountings from the court-appointed Receiver for the companies.

8. SEC v. AFG, Inc, et al., SD-FL, defendants raised and took over $50 million from investors in scheme involving promissory notes and international transfer of funds.

Posted in Recent Cases

Criminal Cases  April 15th, 2010 by John R. Teakell

The following are examples of results that I have obtained while defending clients in criminal cases.

1. DISMISSAL – Sexual assault case, Tarrant County, TX. The State dismissed the case during trial, which attorney Mark Daniel and I tried. The defendant was charged with sexual assault of a child.

2. DISMISSAL – U.S. District Court case, Northern District of Texas. The defendant was charged in federal court with the crime of attempting to bring a firearm on board an aircraft, after a firearm in the checked luggage discharged and shot a baggage handler at the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. The defense focused on the fact that the defendant did not know this firearm was in the luggage, evidenced by security screeners’ failure to detect any firearm when he checked the luggage at the airport. The United States Attorney’s Office dismissed the case prior to trial.

3. DISMISSAL   – U.S. District Court case, Northern District of Texas. Defendant was charged in federal court with immigration fraud, and defense counsel, attorney David Finn and I, negotiated a dismissal with Pre-Trial Diversion. The Pre-Trial Diversion Program in federal court is an unofficial type of probation, wherein the person has to report as if on probation for a period of time, yet there are no charges and no conviction.

4. NO CHARGE FILED – Assault case, Parker County, TX. The defendant was held in custody for assault on a public servant. After I presented the medical/mental history of the defendant, the State did not pursue this charge.

5. DISMISSAL – Child support case , Parker County, TX. Pursuant to a plea agreement on obtaining controlled substances by fraud, the State dismissed the defendant’s criminal failure to provide child support.

6. REDUCED TO MISDEMEANOR – Sexual assault case, Dallas County, TX. Defendant was indicted for sexual assault of a child. I negotiated a simple assault charge for the defendant with probation.

7. DISMISSAL – Family law case, Parker County, TX. I negotiated a dismissal of the assault on a family member charge.

8. DISMISSAL - Probation case, Tarrant County, TX. The State and the Court agreed to dismiss the defendant’s motion to revoke probation, and re-instate the defendant’s probation after seeing/reviewing the defendant’s history.

9. DISMISSAL - Criminal trespass case, Tarrant County, TX. I negotiated a dismissal of the case, which was a criminal trespass charge.

10. DISMISSAL- Burglary case, Parker County, TX. Pursuant to an agreement that I negotiated, the State dismissed the charge of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, and the defendant received probation on the burglary of a building charge.

11. REDUCED CHARGE- Sexual assault case, Parker County, TX. Defendant was indicted for sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child. I negotiated a plea agreement for a reduced charge, which included no sex offender registration.

12. REDUCED CHARGE- Theft case, Tarrant County, TX. I negotiated a dismissal of the penalty enhancement which increased the punishment to 2-10 years, and the defendant received the minimum of six (6) months on the theft charge.

Posted in Recent Cases

Federal Cases April 15th, 2010 by John R. Teakell
Examples of Criminal Case / Government Investigation Results

1. DISMISSAL – Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, U.S. v. W.A. Extortion case – conspiracy to extort money and transmitting interstate communications with intent to extort money. Case was dismissed after Indictment for these extortion charges. The defendant/client was indicted based upon allegations that he stole sensitive material regarding investors from a company and then offered to sell the information for one million dollars. The United States Attorney’s Office dismissed the case after defense presentations which showed no criminal intent by the defendant.

2. NO INDICTMENT/INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re T.H. Bank fraud and false statements to a financial institution. Investigation concerned real estate closings with allegations of inflated appraisals and inflated income/cash flow on loan applications and closing statements. After various meetings with the United States Attorney’s Office and agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and presentations of evidence to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the investigation as to this target/defendant was closed.

3.  NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re H.K. Fraud, Bribery and False Statements to an Agency. Investigation concerned allegations that the target/client, an employee of the Social Security Administration, was obtaining Social Security benefits/monies for persons who would pay him to do so. After various contacts with and presentations to the United States Attorney and the agent for the Office of the Inspector General, the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined prosecution.

4. NO INDICTMENT – Western District of Texas, re M.H. Bribery of Officials. Investigation of monies to school board members in exchange for contracts for services to the local school district. After discussions and presentations to the United States Attorney, the client is not indicted, but will be a witness if necessary.

5. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas, re D.B. Transmission of Pornographic Images/Possession of Underage Images. After discussions and presentations to the United States Attorney’s Office, the investigation was closed with no action.

6. ACQUITTAL (NOT GUILTY VERDICT) – Eastern District of Texas. Client was charged in a conspiracy to distribute cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana. Seven defendants pled guilty and were sentenced to lengthy prison sentences, and three went to trial. The jury convicted two defendants, but acquitted the client represented by John Teakell and David Finn on all counts.

7. DISMISSAL – Northern District of Texas. Client was indicted for attempting to transport a firearm on a commercial airline flight. The handgun, in client’s checked luggage, accidentally discharged and shot a baggage handler at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. After defense counsel reviewed the evidence with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and made a defense presentation, the U.S. Attorney’s Office dismissed the Indictment.

8. DISMISSAL/DIVERSION – Northern District of Texas. Client was indicted for allegedly defrauding the United States Department of Agriculture, specifically, a food and child care program. The U.S. Attorney’s Office dismissed the case before trial after a compelling defense presentation, as the federal prosecutors were not aware of certain evidence that was to be used at trial by the client. The client was on a pre-trial diversion program.

9. IMMUNITY / NO INDICTMENT – Northern District of Texas. Client was a target of a federal investigation for bank fraud and false statements to a financial institution regarding a company’s loan through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). After presentations to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the client was not indicted, but was given immunity from prosecution. The other target was indicted and convicted.

10. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Eastern District of Texas. Client was the target of a federal investigation for illegal sales of military equipment. After a defense counsel presentation to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the prosecution closed the investigation with no indictment.

11. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas. Client was a potential target of a mail fraud scheme in North Texas and elsewhere. After discussions with the presentations to federal agents, the agency declined to refer this client to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for prosecution.

12. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas. Client, a manager of an apartment complex, was a target of a federal investigation for drug trafficking and maintaining a house where drugs are kept or sold. After defense presentation and discussions with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the prosecution declined to proceed against the client.

13. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Eastern District of Texas. Client, a travel agency owner and operator, was the target of a federal investigation for bank fraud and mail fraud. The U.S. Attorney’s Office investigated allegations of fraud for cancelled trips and lost monies after “9/11” restricted booking availability abroad, and declined to prosecute after defense presentations the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

14. NO INDICTMENT / NO TARGET – Eastern District of Texas. Client was considered a subject of an investigation for mail fraud and securities fraud, but was later removed from consideration for prosecution after discussions and presentations to the U.S. Attorney’s Office and investigating authorities.

15. REDUCED CHARGE – Western District of Texas. Client was indicted for possessing and passing counterfeit currency after a U.S. Secret Service investigation with the U.S. Attorney’s Office. After preparing for trial and making defense presentations to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the charge was reduced to a misprision of a felony — failure to apprise law enforcement of an on-going felony. The client pled guilty and received probation. A conviction on the counterfeit currency charges would have normally resulted in federal prison time.

16. DEFENDANT RESPONSIBLE FOR LESS THAN GOVERNMENT CLAIMED – Eastern District of Texas. Client proceeded to trial on this drug trafficking Indictment and was convicted, although the client was responsible for much less cocaine than the government alleged. The government’s witnesses originally alleged that the client was involved in at least one hundred (100) kilograms of cocaine, but the jury found that the client was responsible for only 500 grams to less than five (5) kilograms of cocaine.

17. SECURITY CLEARANCE NOT REVOKED – U.S. Department of Defense, Office of Hearings and Appeals. Administrative action sought revocation of a security clearance issued by the Department of the Navy for an employee of a company engaging in providing and maintaining weapons systems equipment and communications. After a trial, the administrative judge declined to revoke the security clearance.

18. NO INDICTMENT/NO TARGET – District of Columbia. In re GG. Client was targeted in a communications company fraud investigation for mail fraud and wire fraud, concerning unsolicited emails forwarded to persons and the content thereof. This criminal investigation began following an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. After the defense demonstrated that Client was not responsible for the email transmissions, but rather only sold the lines and communication capabilities, the U.S. Attorney’s Office removed him as a target in the investigation.

19. INVESTIGATION CLOSED/NO INDICTMENT – Northern District of Texas. Dallas Division – R.C., Investigation of a tax preparation service for allegations of assisting tax filers with false deductions to reduce taxable income and/or to obtain a tax refund that the filer would not be entitled to receive. No charges/Indictment of the target of the investigation.

20. NO REVOCATION OF SECURITY- U.S. Department of Defense, Administrative Law Hearing, Security Clearance Revocation Hearing, re G.M., The United States Department of Defense, Office of Hearings and Appeals conducted a hearing in this attempt to revoke a security clearance based upon criminal cases against the person who held the security clearance. The U.S. Department of Defense’s Legal Services Agency brought the action against the client and attempted to revoke the current clearance and to prevent the client from obtaining a security clearance in the future. After briefing the administrative case law and conducting a hearing, the Administrative Judge found for the client.

Posted in Recent Cases

Defense Cases & Outcome April 15th, 2010 by John R. Teakell

1. No Revocation – Probation Violation of Felony Possession Case, Hopkins County, Texas, B.C. The State’s revocation/adjudication petition to revoke supervision was based upon new charges in another county. Negotiated for dismissal of the petition to adjudicate.

2. Dismissal – Assault, Domestic Violence, Collin County, Texas, M.S. Case dismissed upon presentation of materials to the Collin County District Attorney’s Office, after concluding a defense investigation.

3. Dismissal After Indictment – Felony Pointing a Weapon, Dallas County, Texas, J.J. Case was dismissed by the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office after defense investigation information was presented to the District Attorney.

4. Grand Jury No-Bill (Refusal to Indict) – Weapon in a Prohibited Place, Dallas County, Texas, P.H. The Dallas County Grand Jury refused to indict the client for possessing a weapon in a prohibited place, after the defense presentation showed that the client/defendant had no criminal intent to do so. The charge was based upon security screeners at the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport finding a handgun in a carry-on duffle bag, wherein the client had misplaced the handgun. The defense presentation showed that the client did not realize that the handgun was inside this bag that was being screened.

5. Charges Declined – Indecent Exposure, Kaufman County, Texas, L.S. The Kaufman County District Attorney’s Office declined the charge presented to it by the Kaufman County Sheriff’s Office based upon an allegation that the client had exposed himself to a female. The defense input and investigation assisted the District Attorney’s Office to conclude that the client had not exposed himself and/or did not intend to do so.

6. DISMISSAL THEFT – Collin County, TX, State v. J.C. Theft case based upon a bank draft, for the purchase of a vehicle from a car dealership, that was insufficient and lacking funds to support the draft. Defendant/client was in the business of buying and selling cars, and after defense presentations to the Collin County District Attorney’s Office, the prosecution dismissed the case prior to trial.

7. DISMISSAL – State v. F.G., Dallas County, Texas. Injury To Child – prior to trial the State dismissed the case after discussions with the prosecutor about the State’s weak case due to questionable of evidence.

8. DISMISSAL – Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, U.S. v. W.A. Extortion case – conspiracy to extort money and transmitting interstate communications with intent to extort money. Case was dismissed after Indictment for these extortion charges.

The defendant/client was indicted based upon allegations that he stole sensitive material regarding investors from a company and then offered to sell the information for one million dollars. The United States Attorney’s Office dismissed the case after defense presentations which showed no criminal intent by the defendant.

9. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re T.H. Bank fraud and false statements to a financial institution. Investigation concerned real estate closings with allegations of inflated appraisals and inflated income/cash flow on loan applications and closing statements. After various meetings with the United States Attorney’s Office and agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and presentations of evidence to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the investigation as to this target/defendant was closed.

10. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re H.K. Fraud, Bribery and False Statements to an Agency. Investigation concerned allegations that the target/client, an employee of the Social Security Administration, was obtaining Social Security benefits/monies for persons who would pay him to do so. After various contacts with and presentations to the United States Attorney and the agent for the Office of the Inspector General, the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined prosecution.

11. NO INDICTMENT – Western District of Texas, re M.H. Bribery of Officials. Investigation of monies to school board members in exchange for contracts for services to the local school district. After discussions and presentations to the United States Attorney, the client is not indicted, but will be a witness if necessary.

12. NO INDICTMENT / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – Northern District of Texas, re D.B. Transmission of Pornographic Images/Possession of Underage Images. After discussions and presentations to the United States Attorney’s Office, the investigation was closed with no action.

13. DISMISSAL – Weapon in a Prohibited Place, State v. D.C., Dallas County, Texas. Client unknowingly brought a handgun through the screening area at Love Field Airport, Dallas, Texas, when she had misplaced the weapon by leaving it hidden at the bottom of her duffle bag. After it was discovered she was charged with this felony in Dallas County, and after presentations of evidence that showed no intent to violate the law, the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office dismissed the case.

14. NO CHARGES – Dallas County, Texas. Sexual Assault (Juvenile) – the Dallas County District Attorney declined charges after evidence and considerations provided by the defense.

15. GRAND JURY NO BILL (REFUSAL TO INDICT) – Ellis County, Texas. Credit Card Abuse/Theft – defendant was arrested for theft and use of another person’s credit card. After presenting legal arguments and factual information, including a truthful polygraph exam and an affidavit of a person with the defendant, to the District Attorney for presentation to the Grand Jury, the Grand Jury refused to indict the case.

16. NEGOTIATED COUNSELING – State v. N.M., Tarrant County, Texas. Prescription fraud – Investigation of a physician who allegedly wrote numerous prescriptions for controlled substances for fictitious persons. Negotiated counseling instead of prosecution.

17. DECLINED PROSECUTION – State v. M.M., Dallas County, Texas. Presenting/misrepresenting substandard college degree – investigation of an individual who allegedly misrepresented that his college degree was from an accredited university on an application for employment with a police department. After discussions factually and legally with the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office, the D.A.’s Office declined prosecution.

18. REFUSAL TO INDICT – State v. O.R., Dallas County, Texas. Assault with bodily injurt (domestic violence) – Grand Jury No Bill – arrest and investigation of a wife who injured her husband during a domestic dispute. After presenting a packet of information for the Grand Jury’s review, the Grand Jury refused to indict.

19. DISMISSAL – Northern Distric of Texas federal extortion case. Client was indicted in federal court for conspiracy to extort money, and for communications with intent to extort monies, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 875(d), for allegedly attempting to obtain money from the original owners of a lead list of potential investors. After presentations to and reviews of the evidence with prosecutors, the United States Attorney’s Office dismissed the Indictment against my client for lack of evidence.

20. INVESTIGATION CLOSED / NO INDICTMENT – Federal investigation in the Eastern District of Texas for bank fraud and mail fraud.  The United States Attorney’s Office declined in 2006 to seek an Indictment in an investigation of alleged fraud by a travel agency after “9/11” created restricted booking availability abroad.  The U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to proceed after defense counsel presentations.

21. DISMISSAL – State v. BR, Kaufman County, TX. On-Line Solicitation of a Minor (for sexual purposes) case dismissed by the State. Allegation was that the defendant solicited an underage female via email communication to meet for sexual purposes.

22. GRAND JURY NO-BILL (REFUSAL TO INDICT) – State v. CS, Collin County, TX, burglary of a habitation (residence). The Grand Jury refused to indict after defense presentation.

23. DEFENDANT RESPONSIBLE FOR LESS THAN GOVERNMENT CLAIMED – Federal case, U.S. v. WB, Eastern District of Texas. The defendant proceeded to trial in this drug trafficking case and was convicted, although the jury found that the defendant was responsible for much less cocaine than alleged by witnesses for the government.  The government’s case alleged that the defendant had trafficked in at least 100 kilograms of cocaine, yet after trial, the jury found that the defendant was responsible for only 500 grams to less than five (5) kilograms.

24. NO REVOCATION – STATE V. JF, TARRANT COUNTY, TX. Court dismisses the State’s petition to revoke probation after presentation of evidence to the court, along with rehab verification.
25. ASSAULT CASE DISMISSED – DALLAS, TX. Case dismissed at trial after defense presented the fact that the victim‘s testimony would be different than believed by the prosecution.

26. ASSAULT CASE DISMISSED – GARLAND, TX. Case dismissed after defense presented evidence affecting victim’s testimony.

27. ACQUITTAL - U.S. v. CDM, federal court in the Eastern District of Texas.

28. NOT GUILTY  Drug Conspiracy -verdict after trial in a drug conspiracy case.

29. GRAND JURY NO-BILL (REFUSAL TO INDICT) – State v. LG, Dallas County, TX, injury to child case. The Grand Jury refused to indict after defense presentation.

30. GRAND JURY NO-BILL (REFUSAL TO INDICT) – State v. WB, Dallas County, TX, attempting to carry a weapon on board an aircraft. The Grand Jury refused to indict after defense presentation regarding the defendant’s carrying a handgun into the boarding area for flights at Dallas Love Field Airport.

31. DISMISSAL – State v. ZL, Dallas County, TX, unlawful carrying of a weapon. The State was prosecuting this weapon case based upon the client carrying a non-folding knife through the security checkpoint leading to the boarding area for flights at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. After defense presentations indicating no intention to violate the law, the District Attorney’s Office dismissed the case.

32. DISMISSAL – State v. MM, Tarrant County, TX, operating a security company without a license. The State dismissed after presentation of the defense investigation results to the District Attorney’s Office.

33. SECURITY CLEARANCE NOT REVOKED – U.S. Department of Defense, Office of Hearings and Appeals v. ST, administrative action seeking the revocation of a security clearance issued by the Department of the Navy for an employee of a company engaged in providing and maintaining weapons systems equipment, and communications. After litigation and a trial, the Administrative Judge declined to revoke the clearance, holding for the applicant/defendant.

34. NO CHARGES/INDICTMENT FOR MONEY LAUNDERING – State v. EO, Kleberg County, TX, arrest and investigation regarding alleged laundering of monies of illegal activities. The State agreed to not seek an Indictment after a defense presentation and settlement on forfeiture issues.

35. DISMISSAL/PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION – federal case, U.S. v. J.T., et al., Northern District of Texas. The U.S. Attorney’s Office dismisses the Indictment alleging fraud in a U.S. Department of Agriculture food and child care program. The federal prosecutors dismissed this case shortly before trial after realizing the defense prepared in this case was significant and compelling.

36. GRAND JURY NO-BILL (REFUSAL TO INDICT) – State v. MM, Tarrant County, TX, impersonating a police officer. A grand jury refused to indict after defense counsel presentation.

37. INVESTIGATION CLOSED / NO INDICTMENTfederal investigation, Northern District of Texas. U.S. Attorney’s Office declines to seek an Indictment in an investigation of facilitating drug trafficking and maintaining a place where drug trafficking occurs, after defense counsel discussions and presentations.

38. DISMISSAL – State v. NH, Dallas County, TX, an offensive touching case.

39. INVESTIGATION CLOSED / NO INDICTMENT – federal case, Eastern District of Texas.  U.S. Attorney’s Office declines to seek an Indictment in an investigation for illegal sales of military equipment, after a criminal defense attorney presentation.

40. INVESTIGATION CLOSED – after a defense attorney presentation to a federal agency about a client that was a potential target of a mail fraud investigation in North Texas, the agency declined to proceed.

41. GRAND JURY NO BILL (REFUSED TO INDICT) – State v. MM, Dallas County, TX, tampering with a witness and operating a security company without a license.  A grand jury refused to indict after criminal defense attorney presentation.

42. GRAND JURY NO BILL – State v. JG, Dallas County, TX, possession of controlled substance.  A grand jury refused to indict after criminal defense lawyer presentation.

43. NO REVOCATION – State v. JR, Dallas County, TX, public lewdness/indecent exposure.  After presentation of criminal defense presentation of evidence to State, the State agreed to not revoke the probation for public lewdness, and agreed to not prosecute for new allegation of indecent exposure.

State v. JF, Dallas County, TX, indecent exposure case.
State agreed to dismiss after presentation of unique circumstances and
evidence not known to the State.

44. DISMISSAL – Kaufman County, TX, theft case

45. DISMISSAL DURING HEARING - In re LN, Dallas County, TX, the court
dismissed an application for a protective order to be entered against my
client.

46. DISMISSAL - City of Addison v. MD, assault case.

47. GRAND JURY NO-BILL - State v. PC, Dallas County, TX, the grand jury refused to indict on the State’s proposed case after defense presentation.

48. NO CHARGES - State v. BD, Parker County, TX, the State agreed to not pursue charges after presentation to the District Attorney.

49. DISMISSAL - Henderson County, TX, DWI case/

50. GRAND JURY NO-BILL (REFUSAL TO INDICT) – State v. NF, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, Dallas County, TX. The grand jury refused to indict after obtaining affidavits from witnesses and after a defense presentation.

51. NO CHARGES / INVESTIGATION CLOSED – State v. WR, Tarrant County, TX, aggravated sexual assault. The District Attorney’s Office declined to seek an Indictment after defense presentations.

52. NO INDICTMENT “ Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Bank Fraud, Mail Fraud, and Conspiracy investigation regarding a mortgage company and employees. Indictment of various defendants alleges that they inflated real estate values and purported income of purchasers, and made transactions with straw borrower purchasers (purchasers in name only) to utilize their credit. After discussions and proffers of evidence, the U.S. Attorney’s Office does not consider client to be a target of the investigation.

53. FEDERAL PROSECUTION REDUCED TO A MISDEMEANOR “ Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, re R.G. Criminal Conflict of Interest case prosecuted by U.S. Department of Justice attorneys and attorneys for the U.S. Postal Inspection Service was based upon union representatives conducting union-related business during working hours and claiming additional hours. Although investigated and presented as a felony offense, negotiations resulted in the reduced misdemeanor charge for the client.

54. Defendant’s Downward Departure of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, Eastern District of Texas, Plano Division, re K.W. Drug trafficking conspiracy case wherein the sentence was reduced by the courts granting a defendants downward departure motion (asking the court to sentence the defendant to a lower amount than the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range as calculated); usually, a downward departure, if any, results from a prosecutor’s motion based upon substantial assistance to the government.