CHANGING a MIND to change a life
Jamie Halper and Adrienne Irmer had the privilege of representing a 59-year old man who worked tirelessly to change his life. Together with AFPD Lisa Ma we learned about our client and shared his story during an early termination motion of supervised release. Our client was already a success based on the compassionate release he received from prison in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. In our motion, which was filed in the 27th of his 60-month term of supervision, we documented that he had been a model of rehabilitation and recovery. While in federal prison, he had completed the Residential Drug Abuse Program. He maintained stable housing and close family relationships after his release. He became a leader within his community.
Since his arrest years ago, he had maintained a clean and sober lifestyle. The government kept a tight grip on his life and caused him undue hardship. His job refused to promote him during his supervised release. We convinced the judge to grant the motion despite his initial inclination. Lisa Ma, the client’s attorney, was able quickly to obtain additional documentation from her client’s employer. Just days before Thanksgiving, the judge granted this motion. Our client spent the Thanksgiving holiday in California traveling, visiting family and attending events he otherwise would not have been able to attend.
Winning the Second Effort Despite a Setback
Adrienne and Jaime represented in state court a client stopped by police while eating lunch on a friend’s truck. The truck was stopped by police because the registration had expired. Our client was recognized from previous interactions, and they began an interrogation for drug possession which had nothing to do the traffic stop. We filed a motion to suppress evidence, arguing that the first officer prolonged our client’s arrest while the second officer turned a valid traffic stop into wrongful seizure. Our constitutional challenge was rejected by the court, which ruled that we were holding the police to a standard unacceptably high. This ruling disappointed us because we were convinced that our client had violated his rights, and that this should have outweighed the interests identified by the judge. We then requested a misdemeanor diversion program, which, if completed successfully, would lead to dismissal and not subject our client’s probation to being searchable. The judge agreed to our request after some negotiations. Our client will be back in court within a few months to ask the judge to dismiss his case.