delco dui law christopher hemmel delaware county pa pennsylvania drunk driving dui dwi defense attorney lawyer and counselor at law
delco dui law christopher hemmel delaware county pa pennsylvania drunk driving dui dwi defense attorney lawyer and counselor at law
delco dui law christopher hemmel delaware county pa pennsylvania drunk driving dui dwi defense attorney lawyer and counselor at law
delco dui law christopher hemmel delaware county pa pennsylvania drunk driving dui dwi defense attorney lawyer and counselor at law

Case Studies
Winning a Felony Drug Possession Case

While driving his vehicle, the client was stopped by the police. The officer smelled the odor of marijuana in the vehicle, and the client admitted to smoking pot earlier in the day. The officer removed the client from the vehicle and conducted a search of the automobile, finding a large quantity of pills, marijuana and other drugs in the vehicle center console. The officer also recovered the remaining marijuana blunt from the client.

The client was arrested and taken into custody. While in custody, the client's cell phone was searched by the police, and incriminating messages regarding drug sales were found on the cell phone.

The client was charged with drug possession with intent to deliver, a felony which can result in a three year jail sentence. This was his very first offense, and the Commonwealth wanted to put him in jail.

Before coming to see me, the client spoke to three or four other attorneys. All the other attorneys told the client that he was facing three years in jail and that there was "nothing they could do" to help him.

When he came to see me, I looked over the facts of his case. I was immediately struck by the fact that the police searched the center console of the vehicle - a clear violation of the client's rights against unreasonable search and seizure. I also noted the search of the client's cell phone - a more murky area of the law, but nonetheless, a search that I believed to be unreasonable and unlawful.

The client retained me to represent him, and we went to court. I filed a Motion to Suppress to prevent the Commonwealth from using the drug evidence against the client. The Commonwealth responded that if the client just pleaded guilty, he would go to jail for a year and a half, but that if the client wanted to fight, then the Commonwealth would argue to put him in jail for three years.

The client decided to fight.

I won the suppression hearing, and the judge suppressed all evidence of the drugs found in the center console. Then I filed another Motion to Suppress to exclude the cell phone evidence which had been wrongfully seized. The police claimed that the phone activated on it's own and that the cell phone messages began appearing on their own! But we hired an expert witness in the area of cell phone technology, and he testified persuasively for the judge that the phone could not have gone off. The only way for the cell phone evidence to have been found by the police was through an unlawful search. The judge suppressed all evidence from the cell phone.

With all the evidence getting suppressed, with the case falling apart before their eyes, the Commonwealth offered to reduce the case down to a simple possession case. The client would not serve any jail time whatsoever, but would simply be on probation for a year, if he would plead to simple possession. Since the client was caught with a small amount of marijuana, this was a reasonable offer.

The client pleaded only to simple possession and did not spend a single day in jail.

This particular case was fought for over three and half years, but the result speaks for itself. The client and his family were completely and totally thrilled with the outcome, and the client was able to get on with his life and stay out of jail.