Reflecting on a case where I defended a client charged with a robbery in the San Fernando Valley, I recall the crucial moment when my client's account clashed with the police report. This discrepancy sparked a realization that this case was not as straightforward as it seemed. It underscored the importance of a thorough case analysis, a practice I always adhere to.
I was in the middle of the Preliminary Hearing against a pretty weak prosecutor who hadn't paid attention to the case, and I was grilling over the shopkeeper about precisely what had happened. I got to the point that was untested in the police report.
As I questioned the witness, I couldn't help but notice the prosecutor's lack of attention. Her indifference was a stark contrast to the gravity of the situation. It was a clear demonstration of the impact of being unprepared in legal proceedings, a lesson I always keep in mind.
She had left to go in the back, and when she came back, the person was gone. She perceived that the individual had taken specific property.
But when the police took the report, they had just assumed that the woman was present when the property was born, and it was much clearer that that particular person—the person they were claiming was my client—was the alleged robber.
As the evidence started to come to light, two things became very apparent. First, this was not a robbery because for a theft to occur, the person has to take the property in question from the person's presence.
It's force or fear being used to take the property, and if the woman was not actually in the shop when the property was born, there was no way the case could be a robbery. So, my client would not be held to answer at the preliminary hearing for theft. California Penal Code 211 defines the crime of robbery. Our Los Angeles criminal defense lawyers will provide a further overview below.
Exposing Weak Police Report
But then, when we took the additional step of showing that the woman wasn't even present when the property was allegedly taken, and the police had screwed up. They had done a horrible job on the report.
They might not even be able to prove any cause whatsoever because, for a robbery, you need somebody present when the property is taken or, number two, some force or fear was used during the escape. So, they didn't have that here.
So, the next question will be, can they still charge my client with grand theft because the property was worth over $950.00 since there was no eyewitness to the theft? Some time had passed between the woman leaving the store and coming back, so there was a possibility that somebody else went into the store and took the property.
So, once the judge realized that the entire case was dismissed at the end. I wanted to nudge the prosecutor to have her dismiss the case once she realized how idiotic it was and how poor of a police job they had done, but she was oblivious — she didn't even know what to do, didn't even know what to say.
Weaknesses in the Prosecution's Case
By the time she figured out how idiotic her case was, the judge was dismissing it, and it was over. That's a big thing to have to happen because when you're charged with robbery, you're looking at the prison, you're looking at a strike, you're looking at serving 85% of the time, you're looking at having a violent felony on your record.
It was a great result, achieved through hard work, thorough analysis, and, most importantly, belief in my client. This case serves as a testament to the power of trust in legal defense, a principle I always uphold.
Related:
