CASE RESULTS

Client was facing at least a decade in prison for allegedly sex-trafficking a minor across state lines, as well as related felony pimping charges. Specifically, these offenses are charged as Human Trafficking (California Penal Code section 236.1), Pimping (California Penal Code section 266h), and Pandering (California Penal Code section 266i).
In addition, he was on probation at the time from a previous felony pandering conviction, so was also facing an immediate jail sentence based on that alone.
Result: Case dismissed on first day of trial – DA’s Office decided not to re-file.

The client was charged with 2 counts of Rape. He was facing 2 Strikes on his record and 2 life sentences in prison. Ms.Saffari lined up eight expert witnesses for jury trial. She also provided the District Attorney with a GPS map of the client’s whereabouts on the day in question which proved that the primary accuser was lying. Ms.Saffari was also prepared to impeach the other accuser with irrefutable evidence of her lies based on her social media statements. The District Attorney dismissed the entire case on the first day of trial, and the client walked out a free man after 14 months in custody. (See Corey Stewart's video on my home page.) This case received significant local media attention.

The client was charged with 2 counts of Rape and faced 2 Strikes on his record and 47 years in prison. The client had made statements to the police that sounded like a confession and so the District Attorney thought it was an open-and-shut case. Ms. Saffari took the case to jury trial and was able to cast doubt on the credibility of the alleged victim by showing that she had made prior inconsistent statements. Ms.Saffari put several expert witnesses on the stand and proved that there was a lack of DNA evidence. The result was a hung jury with 6 voting for guilty and 6 for not guilty. During the second jury trial, the District Attorney offered, and the client accepted, one count of misdemeanor Sexual Battery with no Strike and no jail time.

Client repeatedly stabbed his girlfriend with a knife and, therefore, was charged with Deliberate and Premeditated Attempted Murder (California Penal Code section 664 & California Penal Code section 187(a)), which carries a maximum life sentence. In addition, client was facing sentencing enhancements for the following:
Personal Use of a Dangerous Weapon During the Commission of a Felony (California Penal Code section 12022); and
Inflicting Great Bodily Injury (GBI) (California Penal Code section 12022.7); and
Strike Offense (California Penal Code section 667(a)&(b) and California Penal Code section 1192.7 (because the client had several previous convictions, including for at least one serious felony).
In addition, while out on bail, the client was arrested for sexually assaulting and committing felony domestic violence against a second woman. He was therefore charged with the following new counts:
Corporal Injury to Spouse, Cohabitant, or Fellow Parent (California Penal Code section 273.5); and
Oral Copulation by Force or Fear (California Penal Code section 287).
He was therefore now facing two life sentences.
Fortunately, LADALF founder Ninaz Saffari pushed tirelessly and aggressively towards trial in the first case (thereby always keeping the prosecutor on the defense). As she did so, she was able to successfully argue that there was no proof the attempted murder charge was intentional. Better yet, she was able to present evidence that the attack may have been in self-defense.
Finally, she was able to consolidate both cases into a single felony plea for attempted Voluntary Manslaughter (California Penal Code section 192(a)).
Result: Nine years, out in four-and-a-half with time served and good behavior.

Client was charged with 2 felony counts of Failure to Register as a Sex Offender. The District Attorney had previously made an offer of 2 years in prison to the client. The client's previous attorney could not get him a better deal. Ms. Saffari met with the District Attorney Supervisor and showed him that they had inconsistencies in their case based on Ms. Saffari's investigation. As a result, the client served only 30 days in jail instead of 2 years in prison.