2018-2022 presently retained in numerous cases involving police use of force, undercover tactics, entrapment, avoidance of documenting Brady materials, the substandard handling of criminal informants in an undercover capacity and handling and corroboration of criminal informant information. Many of these cases were settled without the need for testimony. Specific details available on request.
Since my retirement from the Department of Justice, and when not working as a police instructor, I have been retained in more than 500 matters involving various aspects of police procedures. More than 90 percent have been resolved out-of-court on the basis of exert witness reports and/or depositions, in favor of my clients. Some of the more notable and interesting cases are as follows in chronological order:
US v Felipe Nevarez, Federal court, Denver Colorado via CCTV. April 14, 2021, Trial Testimony. Defendant was arrested with less than one ounce of methamphetamine and $16,000 cash as a result of a traffic stop. He was charged with possession with intent to distribute which would give the federal government the right to seize the $16,000 as proceeds of drug trafficking. My review and testimony we’re strongly indicative of a lack of standard proof of intent to distribute. Outcome: After 6 hours of deliberation the jury found the defendant guilty of distribution.
Terry R. Baker, et al v Nicholas Goodman, et al., March 19, 2021, Deposition Testimony. A synopsis of my testimony in this matter is that the totality of evidence reviewed through the lens of my almost five decades of training and experience, provides significant reasons to believe that Sgt. Nicholas Goodman, Portland Maine Police Department in his homicide of 22 year old Chance Baker acted in direct and flagrant disregard of the National Standard mandating that the taking of the human life by a law enforcement officer, must be a last resort. He also acted in disregard of the Portland Police Department’s deadly force policy that mandates that deadly force should only be used if the person is an imminent threat to use deadly force against the officer or another. And that my review resulted in elements of probable cause indicative of false reporting, perjury and cover-up to merit this case being forwarded to be appropriate Federal Agency for criminal investigation. Outcome: Pending.
Darrell Siggers v Joseph Alex (retired detective, Detroit Police Department), in his individual capacity. January 28, 2021, Deposition Testimony. I was retained by the city of Detroit, as an expert for the retired detective. The accusation involved claims by Mr. Siggers, that he had been wrongfully incarcerated for a period of 34 years as a result of actions perpetrated (intentionally) by the then homicide detective during his investigation of a 1984 homicide. My complete review of all available documentation of this homicide resulted in findings that detective Alex’s procedures and actions were consistent with the best police procedures, and that I could observe no indications whatsoever of officer Alex having violated either any known Standard of investigative procedure, nor any known Standard of officer conduct; and that the entire lawsuit was sufficiently frivolous to merit review by the appropriate regulatory Organization or agency, and that a frivolous lawsuit of this type, in itself, represented a serious threat to the safety and security of both citizens and police serving and/or living in High crime areas. Outcome: Pending.
Wrongful death beneficiaries of Ruth Helen Harrion v The City of Jackson, MS. Testimony for Plaintiff in District Court, Mississippi, May 13-16 2019. I testified at the Hinds County, Mississippi, District Court, Judge Adrienne Wooten presiding. I testified to a police demonstration of Craven Disregard of the life of 67-year-old Mrs. Harrion. Issues: Decedent had called 911 to report a prowler complaint at 3 AM in a high crime area; that the police came to the residence; police cleared the call making no attempts to personally speak with the complainant to ensure that she was unharmed. While police were checking the outside of the house, the prowler had already entered and was in the process of raping and murdering the elderly woman. My testimony demonstrated unforgivably substandard procedures, cowardice and reckless disregard of her life by police. Outcome: Client’s family awarded $1 million after two days of trial testimony.
Benny Warr v Rochester New York Police Department: January 23rd-24th 2019, Testimony for plaintiff at federal trial in Rochester, New York. Plaintiff, an elderly African American–an amputee largely confined to a wheelchair–was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. During the course of the arrest, the plaintiff’s wheelchair was slammed onto its side after which defendants beat plaintiff with elbow strikes to the head and knee kicks to the body. Outcome: After two days of testimony, the jury found that the defendant police officer had in fact resorted to the use of Excessive Force. Money award matter still pending.
Anthony Hill Civil Case, Deposition recorded in Kingston, NY October 18, 2018. Deposed concerning the Anthony Hill shooting with a focus on substandard training as relates to the police interaction with the mentally ill. First retained in 2015 by Dekalb County, Georgia. Civil Grand Jury: Aided DA’s investigators in follow-up investigation, then testified before the DeKalb County Grand Jury as an expert for the District Attorneys Office in its recommendation that this matter be sent to a criminal grand jury. Case: In the police-involved shooting of veteran Anthony Hill, by Officer Robert Olsen. Grand Jury recommended that officer Olsen case be forwarded to criminal grand jury for a criminal indictment. Testified in 2016, Criminal Grand Jury: I testified before the DeKalb County Criminal Grand Jury as an expert for the prosecution in the police-involved shooting of Anthony Hill, by Officer Robert Olsen. Retained by the Dekalb County District Attorneys Office. Olsen indicted for homicide and false statements. Outcome: On October 14, 2019, Olsen would be convicted in criminal court, Dekalb County Georgia, of criminal assault, violating the oath of his office and making a false statement. On November 1, 2019, Olsen was sentenced to 12 years in prison.
Mississippi v DR. ARNOLD SMITH. Retained in 2012. Daubert Hearing June 9 2017, Civil Trial Settled January 3 2019. Retained by defendant attorney William Bell. Issues: Defense against capital homicide charges based upon significantly substandard handling of informant used in an undercover capacity, as well as significantly substandard police-involved shooting investigation. Dr. Smith, also the target of a civil complaint arising out of the plaintiffs (Lee Abraham) claims that he was subject to significant psychological damage caused by him being forced to witness a police shootout in his office, during which the victim, a man allegedly hired by Dr. Smith to kill Mr. Abraham, was himself murdered by police presence of Mr. Abraham. I filed lengthy expert witness reports (and underwent a 7 ½ hour Daubert hearing), in which I identified elements of probable cause strongly indicative of the victim having been the target of a premeditated homicide orchestrated by Mr. Abraham who was aided and abetted by individuals in the State Attorney General’s Office; elements of probable cause sufficient for my recommendation that the entire matter be transferred to the appropriate independent federal agency for criminal investigation. The civil trial was settled on January 3, 2019 with an undisclosed settlement agreement. Criminal trial is still pending.
US v Moser and Martinez, Guam Federal Court. Hung Jury January 2019. Issues: This matter emanating from the rest of the defendants in California for possession of in excess of $1 million value of amphetamine, which they were allegedly in the process of exporting into Guam. The arrest occurred 2012. I was retained in 2016 only two months prior to trial replacing another expert who have been retained almost 3 years earlier. During my review of all discovery materials, I was able to identify significant elements of probable cause indicative of –disregard of virtually all professional and national standards as they relate to the recruitment, management and corroboration of undercover criminal informants—Substandard informant management practices that resulted in a situation strongly in enabling of entrapment of defendants by set informant.—False official reporting by both omission and commission.—the avoidance of, and/or the concealment of exculpatory evidence, and/or, evidence that would have discredited undercover criminal informant.—cover-up of informant criminal activity.—a non legal relationship between undercover informant and is the law enforcement handlers.—Sufficient probable cause of criminality on the part of law enforcement to merit an independent criminal investigation to be conducted by an independent Federal investigative body, and/or, Grand jury. Filed detailed reports and conferred with team of attorneys during which I strongly recommended the entrapment defense, which was adopted by defense attorneys. Filed detailed menus of suggested cross examination, both specific and general. Outcome: As a result the two jury trials in the federal court of Guam, have thus far resulted in hung juries as of January 2019.
Canada Crown v Rajwinder GANDHAM. Cross Examination Menu provided October 2018. Issues: Defendant arrested in possession of in excess of $1 million in cocaine conceal in an intricately built Secret compartment of a Jeep. The arrest came after a three-month investigation and surveillance of a criminal organization. I was retained and furnished with significant amount of discovery materials. The prosecutor announced that he was going to use an RCMP expert witness who would testify that the amount of money-value of the illegal drugs precluded the notion that he could be unaware that he was, in fact, transporting illegal narcotics. My review of Materials indicated significant elements of probable cause indicative of the defendant having been used as one would use a canary in a mine shaft, i.e. a “blind mule.” My review of the discovery materials also revealed indications that, by the time the vehicle was loaded with drugs and had been given to the defendant to “use” on a lengthy trip, the criminal organization had detected signs of surveillance, making it highly unlikely that a member of said organization would risk being caught driving that car. In furtherance of this defense theory, I furnished defense attorneys with detailed menus of cross examination questions that would also bring out the fact that both prosecutor and police had a voided any inquiries that would have yielded any exculpatory information. On my arrival in court in Canada, the prosecutor decided not to use his expert. Defense attorneys then made the tactical choice of not using my testimony; however, they did employ much of my suggested Lines of Cross Examination. Outcome: Defendant found not guilty.
Sherry Johnson, et al, v City of Philadelphia, Philadelphia Police Department, et al. (Police involved homicide of Kyree Johnson), Expert Witness Report, July 30, 2018. Issues: Mr. Johnson, a pistol license holder, was the victim of two unknown perpetrators who entered his car at gunpoint for the purpose of robbing him. Mr. Johnson drew his own gun, the perpetrators exited his vehicle running. Mr. Johnson got out of his vehicle firing his own weapon at fleeing robbers. The Philadelphia police officer proceeded to drive up behind Mr. Johnson as this was happening. The officer opened fire hitting Mr. Johnson three to four times in the back. Johnson went down on his stomach, arms stretched out, the gun beneath his body. The officer approached and continued firing, striking Johnson 3 to 4 more times in the back. My opinion was that the first 3 to 4 shots in the back were justified. The additional 3 to 4 shots in the back, while Johnson was in the supine position, were not justified and in essence an execution style shooting. I submitted a 70 page expert witness report, citing elements of probable cause, and elements of proof indicative of: unjustified use of deadly force; premeditated homicide; false official reporting, cover-up, failure of the Philadelphia police department to train, supervise, and/or provide oversight to defendant officer; avoidance of “Bad evidence” by defendant Philadelphia police department management. Outcome: The case was settled with an undisclosed amount of payment.
US v Damon X. Hedgecock, IS1 / E-6 U.S. Navy, Testimony before Hawaii Judicial Circuit Navy-Maries Corps Trial Judiciary, General Court Martial, Telephonic Testimony April 18, 2018. Issues: Homicide investigation, dependent upon interrogation of informants. Expertise in police investigative procedures including but not limited to interrogations and interviews, accepted by judge Advocate Gen, via telephonic testimony.
The Estate of Charles Burns v Concord California Police Department et al. Deposition recorded in Kingston, NY January 12, 2018. Issues: I represented the family of 22-year-old Mr. Burns, who was shot and killed by two officers firing a total of 16 or more rounds at the young man as he allegedly fled from police while reaching for cell phone, that defendant officers claim, they mistook for a gun. After Mr. Burns had been mortally wounded, defendants then caused him to be attacked by an attack trained K9 dog; the dog was permitted by defendants to viciously maul the dying young man. Testified at seven-hour deposition. Outcome: Case settled for $2.5 million within weeks of my deposition.
Joshua Skinner v Vermont State Police, (Tower et al.), Deposition recorded in Kingston NY November 15, 2017. Matter still pending 2019. Issues: Retained by attorney Brian Mariscovetere, White River Junction VT. Case involved Iraq Veteran allegedly being taken into custody for his own protection under Vermont law providing for forced detention due to drugs and/or alcohol intoxication and/or other situation wherein the subject, while not having committed any crime, can be detained and brought to a detox center. Plaintiff was passenger who attempted to film the arrest. Plaintiff arrested and beaten by defendant police. Filed Expert Witness report on behalf of plaintiff alleging false arrest, excessive fore, unlawful use of deadly force and other related violations of law by defendants. Outcome: Trail Pending
Estate of Darrell W. Kempf v Trans America Insurance Company. Deposition via Skype in High Falls, NY September 8, 2107. Issues: Case involved a $2 million dollar life insurance claim against Trans America. Darrell Kempf vanished 7 years ago, after his car was reported in a one-car accident, capsized in a California body of water. Crime Scene revealed evidence indicative of the accident having been staged. Testimony based upon my extensive experience hunting fugitives, along with first-hand experience and training involved specifically with hunting individuals seeking to escape prosecution in South America. Outcome: After deposition, a favorable out-of-court settlement was reached.
Marcia Przybysz, vs. City of Toledo, Toledo Police Department et al., Deposition in High Falls, NY April 16, 2017. Issues: Testimony in favor of police. Thomas Prsybysz, was arrested by Toledo PD undercover officers for narcotic violations. As a result, he volunteered to be an undercover informant. After a successful buy-bust set up by Thomas, he was murdered. The suit alleges that the Toledo PD failed to act appropriately to protect the decedent from retribution. I filed a report in support of the Toledo Police indicating that as per my review, through the lens of my five decades of training and experience, and in consideration of the totality of evidence presented, the defendants have adhered to all professional and national standards and had acted in a reasonable manner. Outcome: Judge subsequently dismisses all charges against defendant police officer and Monell charges against Toledo PD; cited my testimony in ruling.
State of Maryland v Earl Lee King, Cross Examination Menu provided March 2017. Issues: Retained by Public defenders office to evaluate interrogations of informants for adherence to search-for-truth doctrine and other standards of interrogation. Provided attorneys with detail suggestions of cross-examination to highlight the substandard inferences of threats and/or promises. Outcome: Matter concluded with a Plea agreement.
James P. Crocker v Deputy Sheriff Steven Eric Beatty et al. Deposition recorded in Kingston, NY March 8, 2017. Issues: Sheriffs Deputy seized iPhone from Plaintiff, claiming that the seizure was “evidence” in that it contained photos of an auto accident that might contain “photographic evidence” pertinent to the fatal accident. When Plaintiff questioned officer and did not follow deputies’ orders to drive to a location and wait, plaintiff was arrested. Filed report in favor of plaintiff indicating that the arrest was false and the seizure was illegal, Internal Affairs investigation and reporting what conducted it in violation of search for truth standards, resulting in probable cause of false official reporting. Outcome: Out-of-court settlement reached for an undisclosed amount.
Cody Greene v Norwalk Connecticut Police Department. Deposition recorded in Kingston, NY March 21, 2017. Issues: Plainclothes officers beat Plaintiff brutally during an arrest. Substandard undercover operation resulting in undercover officers appearing like thugs instead of law enforcement; failure to appropriately identify themselves a police officers; Defendant officer resorted to the use of grossly excessive force, when little or no force was reasonably necessary. Report included significant elements of probable cause indicative of violation of search for truth standards in that investigative and interrogation leads that would have yielded incriminating evidence toward police were explicitly avoided. Report filed and deposition testimony in favor of plaintiff.
Alvin Kennedy and Elizer Feliciano vs Municipality of Anchorage, Alaska. Retrial 2017. Testified in the High Profile Trial of 2014. Issues: Retained by municipality of Anchorage as expert in defense of multiple charges including the unlawful disbandment of an undercover narcotic enforcement unit; that the two undercover officers were unlawfully searched due to racial discrimination and that the department itself was racist. I filed an Expert Witness report indicating that the plaintiff officers had in fact conducted themselves in a manner significantly contrary to National Standards of Undercover Tactics and Informant Handling practices to a degree that justified the Anchorage Department to shut down and disband the unit. I testified at high-profile trial in 2014, in support of defendants. Jury returned a verdict against all plaintiff charges except the charge of racism in which there was a hung jury. A retrial scheduled during 2017 solely on the racism charges during which I was not called to testify.
Joseph Barone v FBI / USA. Deposition at the Southern District US Attorneys Office NY, September 16, 2016. Issues: Mr. Barone, an 18 year protected FBI criminal informant and high level Mafia associate was engaged in a murder for hire plot. He agreed to be an informant for the FBI, however, refused to wear a wire as doing so would be a virtual death sentence. He was then arrested and charged with a homicide conspiracy. As a result of the charges and the handling of same by the FBI, Barone was publicized as an FBI informant in the news. After having been found not guilty of the charges, he filed a suit in federal court claiming that the revelation of his identity as an informant would have him living under a death threat for the rest of his life. My expert testimony focused on the impossibility of a FBI informant (high level Mafia associate) maintaining his cover for 18 years without committing numerous and violent felonies on an almost daily basis and of the FBI necessarily being aware of and avoiding knowledge of same.
Elliot Stoney Bowles v Captain Mark Mayon, City of Cartersville, GA et al. Deposition on March 11, 2016. Issues: I provided expert testimony on behalf of the family of victim of a police-involved shooting, 66 year old Jeanne Murray, during a No-knock search warrant execution based on two sales of user quantity marijuana and improperly controlled and corroborated informant. Among my findings were indications that investigative and interrogation procedures and tactics that would have elicited incriminating evidence for police what avoided, resulting in false Official reporting by material omission, and that the amount of PC of cover-up, falsification of testimony etc., merited criminal investigation by federal authorities.
Phillipe Holland v Philadelphia police department. (2016). Atorney T Tracie L. Palmer, Esquire KLINE & SPECTER, P.C. The case involved the shooting of plaintiff by undercover (plainclothes) officers, as plaintiff, an African-American, made a pizza delivery. My review indicated that defendants Head violated numerous standards and operational procedures relating to undercover and plain clothes procedures, creating a reasonable fear on the part of plaintiff, that the police were malefactors attempting to rob him. I also found significant elements of probable cause indicative of the officers having provided false official reports and statements in an attempt to cover up the deed. Outcome: The case settled for $4.6 million in 2018.
Joshua Kahan v State of Connecticut, filed Report. Retained 2015, matter still pending 2019. Retained by plaintiff attorney, Matt Auger. Issues: Grossly excessive use of force and elements of PC indicating deceptive use-of-force investigative tactics by management; that is there were elements of PC indicative of avoiding investigative steps that might yield incriminating evidence against defendants. Expert witness report so stating is filed.
Dekalb County v Dove, filed Report and Testified before Grand Jury. Retained in 2015. Retained by Dekalb County Georgia as consultant and testifying expert witness in police-involved shooting (Almy: deceased). Issues: Filed report in support of indictment. Testify before Grand Jury in Dekalb County. Also testified as to police department management attempts to avoid investigative and/or interrogation tactics that would have yielded evidence that would have incriminated police. Grand Jury recommends consideration of indictment.
ESPINOSA v County of Riverside CA. Retained 2015. Retained by plaintiff attorney Alexander J. Petale. Issues: Illegal seizure of funds based on substandard investigative tactics and deceptive and substandard police reporting. Out-of-court settlement reached.
Michael Rew v Cory Dietz and County of Niagara Sherrif’s Department. Retained 2015. Testified at trial State Supreme Court, Niagara County, Niagara Falls, New York. October 26, 2015. Retained by Attorney Max Humann, Buffalo, NY.
WESCOTT v Tampa Florida PD. Retained 2015. Retained by plaintiff attorney TJ Grimaldi. Issues: Civil suit evolving from the police-involved-shooting of plaintiff as the result of a drug raid executed by a SWAT team on the basis of informant information that was corroborated in a substandard and improper manner. Outcome: Out-of-court settlement reached.
MAYS v New York City Police Department. Retained 2015. Retained by plaintiff attorney Anthony Ofadile, Brooklyn NY. Issues: Civil suit evolving from a police shooting, Plaintiff charges excessive and unlawful use of deadly force. Conducting investigation, reviewed all materials, filed expert witness report in favor of plaintiffs claims. Outcome: Case settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.
Iowa v QUIJAS. Retained 2015. Retained by Iowa Public Defender. Issues: In defense of Juvenile shot by shot and severely wounded by police during an undercover controlled delivery of a quantity of Meth, for which the defendant was charged with attempted homicide of police. Outcome: Matter resulted in a Plea bargain.
Holcomb v WINKLER and City of Princeton West Virginia Police Department. Retained 2015. Retained by Attorney David Slicer and Dominick Pellegrin. Issues: In defense of the Princeton WVA Police Department against accusations of failure to take preventative actions in case of an Officer accused of using his power and authority to coerce plaintiff into a homosexual relationship. I submitted strong, point by point Report in support of the police. Outcome: As result of report, Plaintiff action was rejected by court and the case was removed from the docket.
MORSE v Commonwealth of Mass. Retained 2015. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Provide 6 hour deposition testimony on 1/26/15 based on opinions that defendant police engaged in substandard and deceptive investigative and interrogation procedures and police reporting related thereto, and as to utilized excessive force in executing a forceful and warrantless entry into the home of plaintiff.
Cody Greene v Norwalk Connecticut PD, filed Report, Retained 2014, matter still pending 2019. Retained by plaintiff attorney, Phillip Russell. Issues: Grossly excessive use of force and elements of PC indicating deceptive use-of-force investigative tactics by management; that is there were elements of PC indicative of avoiding investigative steps that might yield incriminating evidence against defendants. Expert Witness report stating so, is filed.
State of Alabama v Trenton Isaac Driver, filed Report and Affidavit, Retained 2014. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Charges relate to Mr. Driver having been seduced on the internet by an undercover officer posing as a young girl. Filed a report and affidavit on behalf of defendant criticizing police undercover tactics as having been grossly substandard and overwhelmingly evincive of entrapment. (“hunting deer in a duck pond”) Also noting indication of false reporting by omission and violations of national and professional standards of evidence handling. Outcome: On June 26th 2019, the court dismissed all charges against Mr. Driver.
Japan v Lindsay McNicol. Retained 2012. Testified in Tokyo on July 4, 2013. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Testified as expert in “Blind Mule” defense of woman charged with the smuggling of $10 million in Ecstacy Pills into Japan in false bottom suitcase. Testified as police procedural expert with a focus on Japanese police avoidance of all investigative and interrogation tactics that would have yielded exculpatory information.
Piper v City of Elmira NY PD. Retained 2012. Retained by Defendant City of Elmira. Issues: To defend against spurious charges of excessive use of force. Brian Maggs, attorney. Filed Expert Witness Report in favor of defendant police department. Court considered report and dismissed claims against police.
GA v Luther Lewis. Retained 2012. Retained by by Fulton County (Atlanta, District Attorneys Office). Issues: To review the police involved shooting homicide of Ariston Waiters. Testified before Grand Jury recommending indictment for homicide. In 2015, a second Grand Jury refused to indict officer.
Coleman v City of Niagara Falls PD. Retained 2011. Retained by plaintiff attorney, Steve Cohen Issues: Grossly excessive use of force and elements of PC indicating deceptive use-of-force investigative tactics by management; that is there were elements of PC indicative of avoiding investigative steps that might yield incriminating evidence against defendants. Expert witness report so stating is filed. Outcome: Case settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.
Estate of Hoffman v City of Tallahassee et al. Retained 2011. Retained by the Plaintiff’s family, Attorney Lance Block. Issues: Civil case involving gross violations of professional standards relating to the handling and protection of informants, undercover tactical practices. An investigative review resulted in my being able to identify significant elements of probable cause indicative of false official report and cover up in violation of national management and oversight and accountability standards. I testified in two depositions. Outcome: state settled in a $2.6 million settlement, and new laws that were promulgated by the state for the protection of informants.
Princess v US. Retained 2009. Retained by the Plaintiff. Issues: Federal Judge Opinion as relates to DEA’s duty to protect its undercover informants, sets standards. I testified as an expert on Informant Handling procedures in two depositions and a federal trial. The judge’s actual decision (click here – PDF)contains important information for attorneys involved in informant handling issues. What is important to highlight here is that, following my testimony that I had identified significant elements of probable cause suggestive of high-level corruption, meriting that the entire matter be considered for criminal investigation and prosecution, the judge did in fact forward the case to the inspector general’s office for investigation. Outcome: Informant “Princess” awarded $1.1 million.
US v MIRANDA GARCIA. Retained 2009. Retained by the Defendant. Attorney James Mathew Brown, San Diego Issues: Blind Mule defense. Substandard investigative tactics by ICE, resulting in the loss and/or avoidance of exculpatory evidence (avoidance of bad evidence). Outcome: Plea bargain reached.
JAPAN v YOEL GOLDSTEIN, et al. Retained 2009. Retained by the Defendant. Issues: Blind Mule Defense of Hassidic youth, victimized as blind mule, transporting MDMA concealed in false bottomed suitcases from Amsterdam to Tokyo. Attorneys: T. Nakamura, Tokyo, Eli Bindinger, Antwerp and A.Nexri, London. I was the first United States police procedural expert whose testimony was accepted by a Japanese court. Outcome: After trial, the defendant was found not guilty.
WEATHERSPOON et al. v PELFREY. Retained by Plaintiff’s family. Issues: Excessive use of force during an undercover arrest, substandard police procedures in planning raid, substandard informant handling procedures. Attorney Tom Boyers, Gallatin TN. Outcome: Agreement reached out of court.
CA v MICHAEL MADISON. Retained by the Defendant. Issues: Substandard interrogation of informant in homicide case. Violation of search-for-truth principles evident during interrogation. Superior Court California, Contra Costa County. Attorney Robert Johnson. During trial, I was able to use video recordings of interrogation of Government informant/witness, to point out specifically where the district attorney avoided delving into areas that would have likely produced exculpatory information. Outcome: Client found not guilty after trial.
US v SARAN. Retained by the Defendant. Issues: Blind Mule Defense and substandard interdiction investigation, resulting in loss of exculpatory evidence. Federal Court Seattle WA, March 2009. Attorney Robert Leen. Outcome: Plea bargain reached.
US v RASHEED KHAN. Retained by Defendant. Issues: RICO conspiracy. Substandard informant handling and corroboration. Attorneys: Robert Simels and Jush Dubin, EDNY, New York City. During the course of this or High-profile, International narcotics conspiracy case, defense attorney Simels was arrested and charged with conspiracy to murder Government witness/Informant. Outcome: Simels was convicted and sentenced to 10 years in federal prison.
CROWN v DEREK LAVIOLETTE. Retained by the Defendant. Issues: Blind Mule defense and Substandard interdiction investigation. Submit report to defense attorneys British Colombia. Outcome: Plea bargain reached.
CROWN v WILLIAM SUELZLE. Retained by the Defendant. Issues: Blind Mule Defense, and Substandard Interdiction Investigative Tactics by RCMP. Testimony also encompassed substandard Interrogation and Interview Tactics, resulting in the obfuscation of Exculpatory Evidence. Testified at criminal trial Regina Supreme Court, Surrey, BC (Judge Field) Defense Attorney, Howard Rubin, Vancouver BC. Conviction; however, testimony taken into consideration during sentencing.
SHANNEL HARRISON v NYPD. Retained by the Defendant Police. Issues: Excessive force alleged against an NYPD raid team conducting a no-nock search warrant, Bronx, New York. Bronx County Supreme Court. Report filed in favor of DEFENDANT POLICE. Bronx county Supreme Court. Client. New York City Tort Bureau (Bronx Office) Joseph Mohbat, Attorney. May 2008. Outcome: Out of court settlement reached.
US v DANA LEE. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA.Issues: Substandard informant handling, corroboration, reporting and undercover tactics, by SFPD. Attorney Brian Berson, San Francisco, CA. Filed report identifying specific elements of probable because found during review, that were strongly supportive of the defendant’s claims. Outcome: Plea bargain reached.
US v BERNARDO LACOUR. Retained by the Defendant. Issues: Substandard informant handling and corroboration by FBI. Informant Entrapment. Attorney: Hugo Rodriguez, Miami, Florida. Filed report identifying elements of probable cause indicative of significant violation of national and professional informant handling standards. Plea bargain reached.
KEANE v US. Retained by the Plaintiff. Issues: False arrest. Substandard Controlled Delivery tactics employed by DEA. Substandard corroborative investigation. Substandard procedures. Attorney Carl Keane. San Francisco, CA. File expert witness report, detailing specific elements of Probable cause identified that strongly support plaintiff claims. Settlement reached.
US v JAMES ALLEN LEYSTRA. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Blind Mule Defense, and Substandard Interdiction Investigative Tactics by ICE. Testimony also encompassed substandard Interrogation and Interview Tactics, resulting in the obfuscation of Exculpatory Evidence. Testified at criminal trial Federal Court, Seattle WA. Defense Attorney, Jesse Cantor, Seattle WA. May 2008. Conviction, however, testimony taken into consideration during sentencing.
US v YEPIZ. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Wiretap, RICO, Conspiracy charges. Substandard investigative procedures in investigation involving coordinated wiretap, informant undercover action. Attorney Greg Nicolaysen, Los Angeles, CA. File detailed expert witness report in support of defendant. Plea bargain reached.
US v ROGELIO OJEDA QUINTERO. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Blind Mule Defense, and Substandard Interdiction Investigative Tactics by ICE. Testimony also encompassed substandard Interrogation and Interview Tactics, resulting in the obfuscation of Exculpatory Evidence. Testified at criminal trial San Diego, CA. Attorney John Lemon, San Diego CA. First trial hung jury. Second trial: Captain of ship changes claim to “blind mule” defense. All convicted.
NJ v LUIS QUESADA. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Substandard informant handling, entrapment, substandard investigative reporting, substandard supervision and oversight of police narcotics unit, substandard undercover tactics. Attorney Louis Zayas, Hackensack, NJ. Plea bargain reached.
HAMILTON v HALL. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: CIVIL RICO complaint. Police agencies engaging in abuse of power, Final detail expert witness report in which I identify elements of probable cause strongly indicative of substandard informant handling, substandard undercover tactics, unlawful use of force, substandard police supervision, absence of oversight and supervision, violations of police rules and standards of conduct etc. Attorney: J. Michael Southerland, Plymouth MI. Settlement reached.
NJ v RAMON POLANCO. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Substandard investigative procedures, inconsistent statements made in official reporting, and other related maters, pertaining to charges of Possession of Narcotics with Intent to Distribute. Attorney, Louis Zayas, Hackensack, NJ. Plea bargain reached.
VELEZ v NYC. Retained by Plaintiff’s family. Issues: My identification of elements of probable cause strongly indicative of substandard informant handling and protection practices by NYPD Undercover officers, leading to murder of informant. Attorney Michael G. O’Neill, NYC. Settlement reached.
NJ v FRANCISCO MARRERO. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Poorly managed and controlled informant, enabling of entrapment in narcotics trafficking investigation. Facts consistent with entrapment. Substandard management, supervision and training of Undercover Officer, as relates to entrapment and other possible corrupt activities related to substandard and deceptive Informant Handling. Filed report and then affidavit for court. Attorney Louis Zayas. Plea bargain reached.
WI v DOUG STACY. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Substandard Narcotic investigation in support of charges of Possession With Intent to Deliver a quantity of Marijuana. Omission of standard investigative steps and/or inquiries, that might have led to exculpatory evidence (avoidance of “bad evidence”). Report filed. Attorney Terry Rose, Esquire, Kenosha Wisconsin. Plea bargain reached.
CA v HILL. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Substandard investigation and charges of Possession with Intent to Distribute, in relation to an arrest of defendant by California authorities on marijuana possession charges. Also involved are Medical Marijuana considerations. Attorney: J. David Nicks, San Francisco. Plea bargain reached.
STEWART v ALBANY PD et al. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Excessive use of force in the arrest of 15 year old girl. Substandard Internal Affairs investigation. Substandard reporting. Inconsistent statements and testimony in possible violation of law, etc. Filed report and testified at deposition. Attorney. George E. LaMarche III, Troy New York. Satisfactory settlement reached.
FOLEY v ROSELAND NJ, et al. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Excessive use of force, pattern use of police to harass plaintiff over an extended period of time. Substandard police reporting and Internal Affairs Investigation. Substandard hiring and employment of law enforcement personnel. Filed report. Attorney Andrew Calgagno. Settlement reached.
US v BERNARDO LACOUR. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Charge of investment fraud based on entrapment actions of informant under substandard informant control by FBI. Filed report. Attorney Hugo Rodriguez, Miami. Filed detailed Report identifying specific elements of probable cause strongly indicative of substandard and reckless handling of an undercover informant enabling, if not encouraging, entrapment. Plea bargain reached.
US v TAKHAR. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Blind Mule defense in smuggling case involving significant amount of Methamphetamine (100 lbs). Attorney Catherine Chaney, Seattle, WA. Filed detailed Report identifying standing areas of investigation that would have yielded exculpatory information, that were avoided. Plea bargain reached.
ESTATE OF EARL HITCHCOCK v SHERIFF ED DEAN, OCALA COUNTY FLORIDA ET AL. Retained by Plaintiff’s family. Issues: Death of fleeing defendant in motor vehicle stop, at the hands of K-9 deputy. Favor of Plaintiff: Report indicating substandard use of excessive force, unlawful use of deadly force meeting Glick Test requirements, substandard and inconsistent Internal Affairs Investigation, Inconsistent witness statements. Identify elements of probable cause indicative of. Official statements and official cover-up. Attorney Steve Rothenburg, Ocala Florida. The court rejected the case on the basis of a late filing by plaintiff’s attorney.
COLORADO v BRAUNGER. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Review and expert witness report as to Interrogation tactics and overall adherence to search-for-truth principals in an investigation involving charges of assault and robbery. Attorney: Richard Hostetler, Denver Colorado. Plea bargain reached.
LEONA JACKSON v Howard University, et al. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Howard University Hospital police attempt to restrain a PCP intoxicated patient in the university hospital emergency ward. As a result of the restraint, it was alleged that hospital police used unreasonable and excessive force. Filed detailed report and point-by-point affidavit in favor of defendant police officers. Attorney Donald M. Temple, Washington, DC. Settlement reached.
US v ELKINS. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Coercion, veracity of confession to voluntary manslaughter in Veterans hospital, and Mistrust Memory Syndrome; provided consulting services, including expert testimony and aid in the preparation of cross-examination of investigators from FBI and VA Hospital Police. Attorney: Ken Eichner, Denver. Plea bargain reached.
US v YEPIZ et al. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Federal Court Los Angeles California. Prosecution under RICO of VBS gang based on Title III wiretaps. Support defense of CJA client, musician’s claims that expert interpretation of intercepted statements was erroneous and that supporting investigative efforts avoided exculpatory information. Interview of client and aided in extensive cross-examination of investigating officers. Attorney Greg Nicolaysen, Los Angeles. Court paid for my transportation to Los Angeles where I spent two days interviewing the defendant in the Spanish language. Defendant admitted to me that he was in fact lying to his attorney, and, after indicating to me that he has extensive knowledge of extremely large-scale smuggling, agreed to try to reach an informant agreement with DEA and district attorney. However, an agreement could not be reached and defendant found guilty after trial.
REED v SARASOTA, Florida Sheriffs Department: Retained by Defendant. Issues: Claim of illegal search for narcotics against Sheriff Deputy Defendants. Filed Expert Witness affidavit in favor of defendant law enforcement officers and sheriff’s department, July, 2006. Court rejected plaintiff’s claims.
MICHELLE SMITH v NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Raid tactics, use of “flash-bang” distraction device during drug raid in execution of “no-knock” search warrant. Report submitted in favor of police. Retained by New York City, Bronx County, Legal Tort Division. Satisfactory settlement reached.
AUBRETY v SAN ANTONIO POLICE DEPARTMENT. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Excessive Force in the arrests of Danta Aubety and Yolanda Williams; substandard Internal Affairs Investigation; substandard interviews of witnesses; substandard management; substandard investigative and police reporting. Report submitted Federal Court, San Antonio, Texas. Attorney James Myart. Strong detailed support of plaintiff. Satisfactory settlement reached.
STATE OF TEXAS v THEODORE BERRY. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Confession and Custodial Interrogations in police officer killing. El Paso Public Defenders Office, El Paso, Texas. Scott Seagall. Provided detailed analysis of all discovery materials in support of defense. Plea bargain reached.
US v ROBERT RHODES. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Use of force by Homeland Security officer in the restraint of woman taking photos in NO-PHOTO zone, who refused his lawful orders and instead fled and resisted apprehension. Substandard Internal affairs investigation, including substandard defendant interrogations. Testified at Trial in Federal Court, Buffalo, New York. Attorney Steve Cohen, Buffalo, NY. The alleged victim, a Chinese tourist, aroused US politicians such as secretary of State Colin Powell, to apologize to the Chinese government and assure them that the defendant would serve a hefty jail term, before trial. At the trial testimony, there was an issue of the prosecution refusing to investigate allegations that the victim herself was no tourist, but instead a human trafficker. Through a detailed analysis of videotapes of the incident, I was able to demonstrate to the jury video that the officer acted reasonably and with restraint. Mr. Rhodes was found not guilty.
US IMNS v BEZPALO. Retained by Defendant. Issues: weights and packaging of marijuana possessed by client, as grounds for deportation. Attorney Eliza Grimberg, Brooklyn, New York. Submit affidavit to Immigration Court, EDNY. Plea bargain reached.
US v MARTINEZ. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Blind Mule transportation of cocaine as a favor for uncle. Submitted report identifying significant areas, or elements of probable cause indicative of the intentional failure to investigate into standard areas (bad evidence) that could have yielded exculpatory evidence. San Jose Public Defenders Office. Plea bargain reached.
BELCHER v MASS STATE POLICE. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Use of Deadly Force in shooting death of fleeing suspect; Substandard Investigative Procedures and Practices; substandard interviews of witnesses; Police Misconduct. Submit affidavit in favor of plaintiff. Attorney, Robert Doyle, Boston MA. Settlement reached.
STATE OF CT v MISH. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Informant entrapment; Informant Sentencing Enhancement Entrapment; Substandard Informant Controls, interviews and Corroboration. Submit report in favor of defendant identifying elements of probable cause, as viewed through the lens of my training and experience with the Department of Justice, of intentional failure to investigate areas that would have elicited evidence detrimental to prosecution theories. Attorney Dennis McDonough, Bethel CT. (Connecticut state court appointed). Public defender funding would not cover my testimony. Plea bargain reached.
CHAVEZ v STATE OF TEXAS. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Civil law suit involving substandard narcotic investigative tactics, corruption, prosecutorial misconduct, etc; substandard supervisory performance; endemic corruption in overall narcotic enforcement programs, Dallas, Texas, resulting in the illegal incarceration of plaintiff and others. Substandard informant control, interviews and corroboration. Submit affidavit and testify at 2-day deposition with 6 defense attorneys. Attorney Marc Lenahan, San Antonio, Texas. Undisclosed settlement reached.
YORK REGIONAL POLICE, WISCHE, ats KAMADIA (Canada). Retained by Plaintiff police. Issues: whether or not police acted reasonably during undercover operation aimed at arresting FARAZ SULEMAN that resulted in the killing of Mr. SULEMAN. Use of Force; Buy/bust operational procedures. Expert Witness Report and affidavit filed in Canadian court, in favor of the police. Court accepted my report and ruled in favor of police.
US v BANK HAI KHONG, et al: Retained by Defendant. Issues: Criminal Braggadocio and DEA misrepresentation and exaggeration of case and defendant’s role in order to merit OCDETF funding. Substandard control, interrogation and management of informant that was enabling of entrapment. Judge White disallows all testimony in this regard, which may be appealed. Allows testimony that, in my opinion, all KHONG’S statements to undercover officers and on wiretaps were boasting of things he could not, in actuality, accomplish. US Federal Court, San Jose, CA. November 2004. Plea bargain reached.
US v BARAHONA, et al. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Investigative procedures; practices and mores of drug traffickers; use of coercion by drug traffickers; Colombian cocaine trafficking; substandard interrogation and investigation in that avenues that might have yielded exculpatory information and/or information inconsistent with prosecution theories, were avoided or omitted. San Diego Federal Court. Attorney, Andrew Nietor, Federal Public Defenders Office and Steve White, San Diego. Testify at retrial, August, 2004, first trial in May 2004 ended in hung jury.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA v FRANKLIN DIBLASI. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Defendant arrested after state parole search uncovers 3 lbs of marijuana. Faces 3rd strike, indictment charging him with possession with intent to distribute, money laundering and state tax evasion. Issues: Substandard handling and corroboration of an informant; substandard financial and narcotic investigation [avoidance of exculpatory]; prejudicial and substandard reporting; substandard and prejudicial interviews and interrogations; prejudicial and substandard “expert” interpretation of facts; and more. Expert Report and testimony at trial. Attorney S.David Nick, San Francisco. Defendant, under California three strike law, faced a mandatory life in prison. Client found not guilty at trial.
HOLLEMAN v ARKANSAS. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Illegal use of force; Falsified reporting; corruption, etc. Attorney: John Holleman, Little Rock Arkansas. Preliminary report submitted, indicating unlawful use of deadly force, prejudiced investigation by Internal affairs. Undisclosed settlement reached.
WHITE v TEXAS PANHANDLE TASK FORCE AND STATE OF TEXAS, ET AL. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Substandard Undercover operations, narcotic investigative procedures, Police Corruption, Prosecutorial misconduct, identified in Expert Witness Report. Attorneys Hogan & Hartson, Wash. DC. Filed lengthy expert witness report in which I identify significant elements of probable cause indicating of, a massive undercover participation and control of an improperly hired undercover officer. That the entire operation had as its purpose amassing arrest statistics in order to qualify for federal funding. Also identified sufficient elements of probable cause to recommend that the entire matter be examined by the appropriate federal agency for consideration of criminal prosecution. Civil lawsuit settled for $6.5 million in damages and the prosecutor faced disbarment proceedings.
GA v WARD. Retained by District Attorney’s Office Fulton County Georgia. Issues: Police involved shooting resulting in death of teenaged subject, investigative file review and use of Deadly force (manslaughter). Indications of perjured statements, cover-up and other police misconduct, substandard investigative and report writing procedures. (Phyllis Clerk, Assistant District Attorney). Preliminary report submitted.
CROWN V MIHAYLOV, London, England. Retained by Defendant UK Court Appointed Public Defenders. Issues: Substandard Informant handling and corroboration, international smuggling, money laundering, conspiracy, informant testimony, substandard interviewing and corroboration of informants, investigative procedures. Attorneys, Lewis NEDAS & Co. London, England. Preliminary expert affidavit filed with UK court, indicative of previously mentioned findings. As a result, the Crown rejected the US application for extradition.
CADENHEAD v City of Costa Mesa CA and Police Department. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Excessive use of force; substandard stop and search tactics; violations of national standards of conduct for law enforcement; inferred violations of standards of hiring practices; substandard and possibly corrupt reporting practices; and more by expert witness affidavit. Attorney Joseph Hawkins Low, Newport Beach, CA. Settlement reached.
WA v ATIF RAFAY & SEBASTIAN BURNS. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA Attorney Veronica Freitas. Seattle, Washington. Triple Homicide. Issues: failure to adhere to national standards and training in the planning and execution of elaborate undercover sting operation targeting confessions; coerced and involuntary undercover confessions; substandard investigation [avoidance of exculpatory]; police misconduct; perjured testimony; substandard reporting; substandard and coercive interview tactics; substandard reporting; that the alleged confession was, in reality,” criminal braggadocio” a common phenomenon in Mr. big type of undercover scenarios. Summary report submitted to court. Defense attorneys decide to use the “Fear” defense despite expert advice that this will result in judge not permitting expert testimony under the basis of the jury not needing an expert to tell them whether or not the Video tapes of the undercover scenario were indicative of fear or not— precisely what did occur. Case is now High profile with much media coverage and at least three documentary films produced. In January 2019, the Case was covered by Israeli television news reporting.
VILLAREAL v US. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Preliminary expert witness report submitted, Unlawful use of Deadly Force by DEA agents in the shooting of Ashley Villareal. Affidavit filed with San Antonio Federal Court. Attorney: Maloney & Maloney. Settlement reached.
US v ASSETS/BOULTINGHOUSE. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Substandard and insufficient investigation to link assets seized as proceeds of drug trafficking. Failure to adhere to national standards and procedures in documentation of assets as “proceeds of narcotics trafficking”; substandard investigative tactics [avoidance of exculpatory information]; prejudicial and substandard “expert” interpretation. Attorney Richard Barnett, San Diego, by affidavit to Federal Court, San Diego. October 2003. Satisfactory settlement reached.
US v CESPEDES-CANO. Retained by Defendant. Issue: Blind mule receipt of 3 pounds of heroin on controlled delivery; Faulty and substandard investigative procedures [avoidance of exculpatory information]; substandard undercover tactics; failure to adhere to national standards and procedures in reporting. Substandard interrogation of cooperating defendant. Testimony at trial Eastern District of New York, Federal Court, Brooklyn, New York. Attorney, Michael Hammerman, Queens, NY. Defendant found not guilty.
US v CUAHATOMOC GONZALEZ-LOPEZ. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Failure to adhere to national standards of informant handling, interviews & interrogations, narcotics investigations, smuggling investigations and indications of falsification of reports and other misconduct and conspiracy. By report and testimony at Federal Trial, Federal Court St. Louis, MO. Attorney Joseph Low, Newport Beach, CA. July 2003. Plea bargain reached.
STATE OF GA v ALBERT GARRETT. Retained by District Attorney’s office Fulton County Georgia. Issues: Testimony before State Grand Jury as District attorneys expert in police arrest procedures, investigative file review and use of Deadly force (manslaughter). Indications of perjured statements, cover-up and other police misconduct, substandard investigative and report writing procedures. (Phyllis Clerk, Assistant District Attorney). By report and Grand Jury testimony.
CA v EARY and BUTLER. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Defendants possess Medical Marijuana Permits issued under state law. A search by state authorities resulted in what police believed was an amount of marijuana that was “excessive for personal use” and charged the couple with possession with intent to sell, a felony. Expert report submitted in support of the defendants based on the significant failures in police investigation to adhere to standards of proof of possession with intent to sell and avoidance of investigative steps that would have resulted in exculpatory evidence; substandard and coercive interviewing tactics; substandard reporting. By affidavit. Attorney S. David Nick, San Francisco, CA. Plea bargain reached.
US v CHRIS CHAVEZ et al. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Title III, DEA exaggeration of defendant’s role in heroin conspiracy, by virtue of unsubstantiated informant claims, exposing defendant to more severe sentencing measures as well as the omission of other investigative procedures that would have resulted in exculpatory evidence; substandard investigative tactics; prejudicial interpretation of recorded conversation; substandard reporting; substandard interrogations and interviews. Attorney Jason Alarid, Albuquerque, New Mexico. By report. Plea bargain reached.
US v RAMON CORDERO-CARABALLO. Retained by Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Alleged to have fired a gun at a DEA agent who then fired two weapons at Cordero-Caraballo, seriously wounding him (severed spine). No weapon found. DEA charges Cordero with Assault of Federal officer. Unlawful Use of Deadly force, substandard undercover assignment of agent ill-equipped to perform undercover work; Indications of perjured reports; false statements, obstruction of evidence; substandard evidence handling; substandard investigative report writing and crime scene procedures, including substandard interviews of witnesses; investigative misconduct. By Expert Report. Federal Court, San Juan, Puerto Rico. Public Defender, Joseph Laws. Cordero-Caraballo was murdered on the eve of trial. Investigation pending.
US v RAYMUNDO AGUILAR-SANCHEZ et al. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Heroin Conspiracy, Title III. Federal Court, St. Louis, MO. DEA’s exaggeration, by use of unsubstantiated informant claims, of defendant’s role in heroin conspiracy/translation of “coded” dialogue in Title III/Due diligence in investigative efforts. Substandard investigative effort [avoidance of exculpatory]; substandard interviewing techniques; substandard reporting; substandard informant handling. By testimony in St. Louis Federal court. Attorney, Joseph Hawkins Low, Newport Beach, CA.
US v GRANT. Retained by Defendant. Issues: That adequacy and interpretation of DEA/Police investigation supportive of assertions that money seized from defendant George Grant, was the proceeds of drug trafficking; substandard investigation [avoidance of exculpatory]; substandard reporting; prejudicial interpretations of fact presented as expert opinions. By affidavit. Attorney Richard Barnett, San Diego, CA. October 2002. Satisfactory agreement reached.
US v ZAHKAROV. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. US Issues: Crewman was not aware of 10 tons of cocaine concealed on fishing vessel SVESDA MARU, or was he unwitting and/or coerced dupe; substandard interviewing/interrogation tactics; smuggling methods; involuntary confession; substandard investigative process [avoidance of exculpatory information]; substandard reporting. Attorney, Michael Crowley, San Diego (CJA appointed). November 2002. Plea bargain reached.
US IMMIGRATION v RUBEN PEREZ. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Perez, convicted of heroin trafficking after working as DEA informant, is now facing deportation to Argentina. Likelihood of death if deported; substandard and prejudiced treatment of DEA Informant; substandard reporting. By affidavit. Attorney, Steve Morley, Philadelphia, PA. In 2004, trial ruled in favor of client.
US v DAVID BENSIMON. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Defendant convicted of conspiracy to receive and distribute 203 kilos of cocaine as a result of a controlled delivery operation. Affidavits filed in support of application for a new trial based on: substandard smuggling and controlled delivery investigation and undercover tactics; illegal and substandard informant handling; police misconduct; substandard reporting; failure of previous attorneys to utilize expert witness testimony in opposition to government expert, as well as other technical items pertaining to informant issues, smuggling investigative tactics and investigative procedures that were below national standards, including substandard interrogation of defendants. Attorneys Ephraim Margolis and Gary Dubcoff, San Francisco.
US v SHEFQET MATI. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Defendant charged with conspiracy to possess and sell heroin. Expert witness affidavit and report filed, indicating that investigators had failed to adhere to national standards of undercover tactics, substandard and illegal Informant handling, including informant interview and interrogation tactics and investigative process resulting in, and/or, enabling of the entrapment of the defendant. Also included substandard evidence handling and investigative handling procedures; as well as indications of criminal and/or corrupt acts on part of investigators; substandard reporting. Two Expert Witness reports filed. Attorney for Defense, Ralph J. Schindler, Chicago, Illinois. (CJA – appointment). August 2002. Plea bargain reached.
POLK COUNTY IOWA v PATRICK CONNOR. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues:Defendant charged with possession and sale of crack cocaine and assault on two undercover officers. Expert testimony at trial centered on substandard and questionable undercover tactics and unlawful use of force by the UC officers; substandard reporting; police misconduct. Attorney John Wellman, public defenders, Des Moines, Iowa. Defendant found not guilty.
US v ASSETS OF DIANE WEBBER. Retained by Defendant. Issue: Asset seizure. Question: Did agents have PC to believe seized funds were proceeds of “large scale marijuana” trafficking? “ Expert Witness Affidavit submitted indicative of substandard investigative procedures, reporting and reasoning on the part of seizing officers. Attorney Richard Barnett, San Diego, CA. April 2002. Satisfactory agreement reached.
RICO Civil Law Suit. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Expert Witness Report and Affidavit submitted to court indicating specific findings of Probable Cause indicative of criminal RICO activity in certain business practices of a major multinational corporation. Attorney Morgan Scudi, La Jolla, California. Satisfactory undisclosed settlement reached. Details of this case are restricted by a court-ordered secrecy – Federal Judge Irma Gonzalez.
ADAM ALVAREZ v MASARYK TOWERS. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: By Affidavit as expert in building and site security, in support of Alvarez claim that management was negligent in the protection of its premises from intruders. Alvarez, an off-duty detective, was mugged and shot with his own firearm. By affidavit. US Federal Court, Southern District of New York. Attorney Jonathan Reiter. March 2002. Satisfactory settlement reached.
CA v FLORES. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA.Issues: Use of K-9 during investigation pertaining to car-jacking; failure of police to adequately corroborate on-the-spot informant testimony and other inconsistencies in investigative procedure. By Expert Report. Attorney, Tracee May Brewster, Public Defenders office, State Court, Santa Ana California. Plea bargain reached.
CA v MOTT. Retained by Defendant. Issues: By Expert Witness Report in support of defense claim that Mott did not possess 6 grams of heroin with intent to sell. Substandard Narcotic investigative procedures; avoidance of exculpatory information; substandard reporting; substandard informant interrogations, interviews and handling; substandard undercover tactics. Attorney Richard Muir, San Diego, CA. Expert Witness Report before state Supreme Court. April 2002. Plea bargain reached.
NYPD v OFFICER JACQUELINE CAUDLE. Retained by Defendant. Issues: By affidavit in defense of officer Caudle accused by NYPD before GO 15 NYPD hearing, of using her firearm to menace convicted felon, Micah Brown during street altercation. Expert affidavit submitted to NYPD trial board indicating substandard investigative practices in that the complainant’s information should have been investigated with the same diligence an investigator would employ when investigation criminal informant information, but was not, as well as other procedural failures. Attorney Robert Spergel. January 2002. Satisfactory agreement reached.
BASILE v NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: NYPD Police Officer wrongfully suspended for shooting a dog. Testified as expert as to flawed, substandard and prejudiced investigative procedures utilized by NYPD, including matters relating to my military K-9 training and experience. Testified via Expert Witness Affidavit in Civil matter, Federal Court Southern District of New York. Attorney Robert Spergel.
US v DHAKAROV et al.Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Seizure of 9 tons of cocaine off the Svesda Maru. Investigative failures related to international conspiracy investigation, including substandard interrogations and interviews of cooperating defendants that avoided avenues of inquiry that might have yielded information that was inconsistent with prosecution theories. Expert testimony in federal court discussed methods and tactics of drug smugglers in general and the indications present in the instant case that represented a high likelihood that the drugs were destined to Russia instead of US. January 2002. Attorney Michael Crowley, San Diego, (and nine others), before the San Diego California Federal District Court, Judge Jeffrey Miller.
US v MORENO et al. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA.Issues: Seizure of 10 tons of cocaine off Mexican coast (largest seizure in history at the time). Investigative failures including substandard interrogations and interviews that avoided avenues of inquiry that might yield information inconsistent with prosecution theories. Expert testimony in federal court concerning smuggling methods and tactics in general and the presence of factors indicating a high likelihood that the drugs were destined to Russia instead of US. Attorneys Shareen Charlick San Diego Federal Defenders, Nancee Schwartz (and 9 others). Before the San Diego California Federal District Court, Judge Marilyn Huff. October 2001. Despite significant evidence that shipment destined to Russia, court ruled that US had authority.
US v PROPERTY OF CAROLE SCHWENKE AND MICHAEL E. KING. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Illegal seizure by Federal authorities of $248,095 in what was allegedly the proceeds of the narcotic business. Expert Witness affidavit submitted, indicating that the federal investigators failed to document their asset seizure theory with appropriate and easily available investigative techniques was well below national standards for this type of an investigation. Attorney Richard Barnett, San Diego. By Affidavit, Federal Court, San Diego, CA. October 2001. Outcome: Funds returned.
CANADIAN IMMIGRATION v MERCEDES LUNA, DANIEL AND FAMILY. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Likelihood of assassination if deported to Argentina after illegal entry into Canada. After testimony before the Canadian immigration court, defendant permitted to remain in Canada.
SUFFOLK COUNTY v CHARLES VERSAGGI. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Suffolk County, New York Criminal Court, Judge Hudson. Expert witness report indicated substandard Narcotic Investigative Procedures, Police Misconduct and Mishandling of Informant. Expert testimony used during Motion to Suppress. Attorney Fred C. Meyers, West Hampton, NY. June 2001. Plea bargain reached.
TAISHA CALDWELL v TOWN OF CARTERET, NEW JERSEY, CARTERET POLICE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE OFFICER GIULIANO, et.al. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: New Jersey State Court for Civil lawsuit. Expert witness report and affidavit indicating false arrest, unlawful use of force, substandard arrest and investigation procedures on part of officer; substandard investigative procedures on part of Internal Affairs and County Prosecutors office; substandard background investigation and hiring practices. Attorney Ida Cambria. Undisclosed settlement reached.
NAGY v TOWN OF CARTERET NEW JERSEY et al. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Civil case in Federal Court, Newark, New Jersey, by affidavit, charging defendants with substandard and prejudiced investigative tactics; substandard reporting; indications of official misconduct and corruption in the management of investigations targeting Mr. Nagy, who at the time was Carteret New Jersey Chief of Police. Attorney Clifford Kuhn. Undisclosed settlement reached.
US v RUBEN LORA. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Expert witness Report submitted after conviction for use in sentencing hearing. The report indicated findings of Undercover entrapment, Substandard management, interviews and controls of Informant, Substandard Investigative Procedures in Conspiracy investigation, Failure to properly corroborate informant information and failure to control informant entrapment activities. Judge allowed Expert Testimony as to “reality” of the undercover sting in her sentencing deliberations. By report and testimony, Federal Court, Boston, MA. (CJA-appointed). December 2000. Judge took expert opinion into consideration during sentencing.
STATE OF NEVADA v RICHARD POWELL. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues:Multiple Homicide. By affidavit and testimony, indicated improper interviews, investigation and corroboration of jailhouse informant testimony in quadruple drug related homicide. Las Vegas Public Defenders Office. Expert Witness report submitted. September 2000. Court refused to entertain expert witness testimony.
STATE OF NEW JERSEY v ZHENG ZHANG. Retained by Defendant. Issues: shoplifting and assault charges. Expert Affidavit filed indicating Improper and substandard undercover tactics by store detectives and Unlawful use of Force. Attorney Ida Cambria, New Brunswick, NJ. August 2000. Settlement reached.
MILTON BAJANA v CITY OF NEW YORK. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Civil matter. Blind Mule receipt of drugs; False arrest by NYPD based on substandard narcotic smuggling investigation by US Customs and substandard corroboration of information received from US Customs [avoidance of exculpatory] by NYPD; substandard reporting. By report, Attorney Curtis Farber. Eastern District Federal Court, Brooklyn, New York. August 2000. Settlement reached.
US v ANGEL GARCIA SHOBER. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Defendants were offshoot of a major RICO, drug trafficking, money laundering investigation by FBI into the Cali drug cartel. Expert Affidavit submitted for appeal brief, indicating investigative, undercover and informant handling procedures that were well below acceptable standards of law enforcement and enabling of false testimony and entrapment. Affidavit. Attorney, Janice Deaton. Criminal and Civil proceedings. Plea bargain reached.
US IMMIGRATION v LARRY MASTERS. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Opinion for Immigration Court as to whether actions of defendant constituted felony violation of narcotic laws. Expert Affidavit indicating substandard and flawed investigative methods and reasoning used to reach conclusion that Masters was “dealing” drugs. January 2000.
PELLEGRINO v US. Retained by Plaintiff’s family. Issues: Civil law suit, Illegal use of deadly force by undercover US customs agent in the killing of John Pellegrino; indications of false statements, cover-up and substandard investigative report writing procedures; improper surveillance and investigative tactical procedures; substandard high risk stop tactics; improper hiring and background investigation. By report and testimony at trial. Attorney, Katherine Meadows, San Diego. Southern District Federal Court of California, San Diego – Justice Judith Keep. May 1997. Trial resulted in a hung jury, judge refuses retrial, appeal to US Supreme Court was denied.
US v JOHN MULL. Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. Issues: Failure by Nebraska police to manage, control, interview and corroborate an undercover criminal informant as per national standards and training, during a “controlled” crack buy. Testified at Trial. (CJA appointed). Identified significant elements of probable cause indicative of the undercover criminal informant inserting small package of cocaine in her vagina, bringing it into the defendants residence, then exiting in claiming she had bought the drug from defendant. June 2000.
US v RAUL MARTINEZ.Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA.Issues: Substandard use, control, interviews and corroboration by FBI, of a Jailhouse Snitch and an undercover informant to entrap. Public Defenders Office, San Jose, California. Federal Court Northern District of California Judge accepted expert affidavit during sentencing. Resulted in reduced sentencing.
CARLSON v US. Retained by Plaintiff. Issues: Civil law suit involving improper management, control and corroboration of a criminal informant, police misconduct, use of force; Substandard tactics during execution of search warrants; substandard internal affairs investigation (cover-up) and other issues pertaining to a multi-agency, Federal raid on the premises of Donald Carlson. Attorney Jeremiah Coughlin, San Diego. By report before Federal District Court. Identified sufficient elements of probable cause is Indicative of false official reporting and cover-up to merit referral to the appropriate independent federal agency for criminal investigation. Case features on the program “60 minutes,” after which out-of-court settlement of $2.5 million was reached.
US v HECTOR GUTIERREZ. Retained by Defendant. Issues: Substandard Undercover and Informant Handling, Interview and Control Tactics (enabling of entrapment); Substandard corroborative investigation. Testimony at trial also covered international drug smuggling tactics. Attorney Eugene Iredale, San Diego, CA. (Also see: “King Rat” article by Michael Levine). After my testimony before the Federal Court, Southern District of California, judge set aside guilty verdict, orders new trial instructing defense attorney to use entrapment defense, after which plea bargain agreement made allowing the defendant to be instantly released from prison.
US v ALLAN DOTSON.Retained by the Defendant, Court Appointed CJA. San Diego Federal Court. Issues: Substandard Undercover and Informant Handling, Interview and Control Tactics [enabling of entrapment]; Substandard corroborative investigation. By report. Attorney Nancee Schwartz, San Diego, CA. (CJA appointed). Plea bargain reached.