DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INJUNCTIONS Recent Court Wins

Recent Court Wins

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INJUNCTIONS

CASE # H-27-DR-2006-309; JUDGE: Stephen O. Rushing (Hernando County) Date: October 23, 2006

FACTS: Our Client had been in ongoing dispute with a nearby neighbor. This led the client to file a petition for an injunction to prevent his neighbor from coming within 300 feet of him or his family. The judge granted his petition, but also granted the neighbor a similar injunction against our client. The client had not hired a lawyer before filing the petition for the injunction, or the injunction hearing. This led to other problems at his hearing and other problems with his neighbor that were not properly handled. It is extremely important to retain a lawyer as soon as you anticipate the possibility of going to court for any reason!
After our client got his injunction both parties began to call the police over supposed violations of their injunctions. The first injunction led the client to request the Court to grant other injunctions against other neighbors. The neighbor, who had a background in law enforcement, gradually began to win over the police and the state attorney with regards to the actions of our client. The State Attorney became convinced that our client was the aggressor, and filed an aggravated stalking charge against him. The client didn't contact our office until after the aggravated stalking charge was filed! Eventually the client requested a hearing to determine whether his neighbor should be found in contempt of court for violating the court's order on August 11, 2006.
    Our office prosecuted the neighbor for violating the injunction and asked the Court to find him in contempt of court. During our investigation we located an independent witness that was willing to come forward and testify that the opposing neighbor and his wife got out of their vehicle and threatened our client.

RESULT: The Court agreed with us that the neighbor was guilty of violating the injunction and found him in contempt of court. This case is another terrific example of waiting too long to hire a lawyer. Although we won the hearing and it should convince the State Attorney to take a second look at the actions of the neighbor, most of our client's problems could have been avoided had he contacted us earlier. A domestic violence injunction is a serious matter and violating an injunction is even more serious. Don't wait until the situation escalates out of control before you hire an attorney.

CASE #06-DR-017814 & 06-DR-017444; JUDGE: Art Mcneil; Date: October 16, 2006

FACTS: The client was involved in a domestic dispute with his wife.   The wife became very intoxicated and came at him.  In an effort to protect himself he had to throw a phone at her.  After she left the room the client packed his clothes so he could leave the home.  Before he could finish packing the wife came back into the room and punched him in the face.  His injuries were so severe the hospital did a CT scan and a retinal detachment evaluation.   The client was smart enough to get photographs of his injuries taken at the hospital.  Unfortunately, he failed to retain any counsel and attempted to address the custody issues surrounding his son in his own way.  The wife felt so threatened that she called the police and the client was arrested days later for domestic battery.  Shortly after that she retained a lawyer and filed a petition for a domestic violence injunction against our client.   After the client retained our office we filed our own petition for an injunction against the wife, and began defending his criminal charge.        

      Unfortunately, many people file criminal charges against their husband or wife in an attempt to gain an advantage in their divorce proceedings.  The hope is that the person charged with the crime will be convicted and the family law judge will give custody of the children to the non-offending party.  After the wife received our injunction her attorney called our office and we negotiated a settlement of the domestic violence injunctions and the criminal charge. 

DEFENSE:  The client was acting in self-defense when he threw the phone at his wife.  The wife had a drinking problem and caused some noticeable injuries to the client during the struggle.

RESULT:  The domestic violence injunction, and the criminal charges were dismissed.

CASE #06-DR-012520; Judge Raul Palamino; Date: August 1, 2006

FACTS: We represented the Respondent.  It was alleged by the Petitioner that the Respondent had choked her and her 21 year old daughter at separate times.  In addition, she alleged that our client exposed himself to his 5 and 6 year old children at the pool. 

DEFENSE:  None of the allegations contained in the petition contained any information that was relevant to domestic violence against the petitioner.  All the allegations made by the petitioner were either too remote in time to be relevant, or lacked sufficient support through the evidence.

RESULT:  The petitioner’s injunction was dismissed and our client prevailed.

return to top

CASE #05-DR-018734; Judge Art McNeil; Date: January 13, 2006

FACTS:  We represented the respondent against his wife who was petitioning the Court for a permanent injunction against sexual violence.  The defendant was alleged to have touched his daughter below the waist in a sexual manner.

DEFENSE:  The petitioner had ulterior motives for filing for the injunction.  

RESULT:  After discussions with the petitioner and a criminal investigation the injunction was dismissed.

return to top

CASE #05-DR-19862 ;  Judge Raul Palamino;  Date: December 22, 2005

FACTS:  The respondent (our client) was alleged to have punched the petitioner (person seeking the injunction) in the chest several times.   After she punched the petitioner she jumped on his back.  According to the petitioner this incident occurred in front of his 12 year old daughter.   At the initial hearing for a permanent injunction the respondent decided to attend the hearing without retaining a lawyer (pro se), and the court granted the injunction against her. 

DEFENSE:  We filed a Motion for Rehearing to Dissolve Injunction for Protection.  During the Rehearing the Court heard testimony from the respondent and was made aware of the petitioner’s history of violence with the respondent and others. 

RESULT:  The Judge granted our Motion to Dissolve the Injunction against our client.

return to top

CASE #51-2005DR-005921-ES; Judge: Linda Babb; Date: November 10, 2005

FACTS:  The defendant initially attempted to represent himself in a hearing where the petitioner was asking the court for a permanent injunction against him.   The judge granted the injunction against him and the defendant retained our office. 

DEFENSE:  A motion for Re-Hearing was filed and the defendant received a new hearing where we were able to show the Court through the testimony of two law enforcement officers that the petitioner was not credible.

RESULT:  The petitioner’s injunction was dismissed, and our client prevailed

Contact Us for More Information

If you have been criminally charged, your future depends on the quality of your defense. By contacting The Criminal Defense Group, you will get a criminal defense lawyer whose highest priority is zealously defending your rights. Call us today for a free initial consultation. For your convenience, evening and weekend appointments are available by request.