KEY CASES - VICTORIES

FEDERAL APPEALS - CRIMINAL

​

United States v. Iraheta, 764 F.3d 455 (5th Cir. 2014) (holding that search of client's vehicle was unconstitutional and drugs seized from unlawful search were properly suppressed because law enforcement officers did not act reasonably in securing consent to search)

United States v. Blevins, 755 F.3d 312 (5th Cir. 2014) (holding that client's case must be remanded to the district court for evidentiary hearing on Bill of Information requirements)

United States v. Daniels, 723 F.3d 562 (5th Cir. 2013), reh’g granted and remanded, 729 F.3d 496 (5th Cir.), cert. denied (2014) (holding that the district court erred in finding that client and co-defendants conspired to possess with intent to distribute 5 kilograms or more of cocaine powder; Convictions and sentences vacated, and case remanded for remanded for resentencing based on lower quantity)

United States v. Brown, United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 12-30235 (5th Cir. 2012)(unpublished) (holding
that law enforcement officers did not act in good faith in executing a search warrant of client’s home, and judge who issued search warranted did not have sufficient facts for the issuance of a valid search warrant; All evidence seized from client's home was suppressed; Case against client was dismissed and he was released from federal prison)

FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT CASES - CRIMINAL

​

United States v. Dove, No. 20-135 (E.D.La. 2020) (Client was indicted on one count of Use of an Interstate Facility with Intent to Carry on Unlawful Activity (18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)(3)(A)) (Bribery) and one count of Tampering with a Witness (18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1)); Client faced a sentencing guideline range of 84-105 months of imprisonment; A sentencing memorandum and motion for downward variance was filed on behalf of client seeking a downward variance in sentence seeking and arguing for a downward a variance in sentence; the court granted the motion and imposed a varying sentence of 33 months of imprisonment) 

United States v. Jones, No. 98-207 (E.D.La. 2021) (holding that, on a motion filed on behalf of client under the First Step Act of 2018, the client's sentence of life in prison plus 5 years for conspiracy/drug trafficking conviction was reduced to 220 months (time-served after spending 23 years in prison)

​

United States v. Henderson, 660 F. Supp. 2d 751 (E.D. La. 2009) (holding that, on motion for downward variance and sentencing memorandum filed on behalf of client, the court held that a downward variance in client's sentence was warranted due to its rejection of 100:1 punishment ratio for crack cocaine vs. cocaine powder and adopting a 1:1 sentencing ratio (pre-Federal Sentencing Act 2010 ratio of 18:1)

United States v. Holden, USDC - Eastern District of Louisiana, Case No. 09-261 (Client indicted on drug trafficking offenses; Client pleade guilty; Client faced career offender sentencing guideline range of 262 to 327months of imprisonment; As a result of a sentencing memorandum and motion for downward variance filed on behalf of client, the Court granted downward variance in sentence; Client sentenced to 200 months of imprisonment

United States v. Clark, 2008 WL 1743347 (W.D. La. 2008) (unpublished) (holding that, on a Motion in Limine filed on behalf of client, evidence of client's prior conviction would be inadmissible at trial)

United States v. Colomb, 448 F.Supp.2d 750 (W.D. La. 2006) (holding that client and co-defendants' due process rights, including the right to a fair trial, were violated when the court failed to declare a mistrial following discovery of letter from a federal inmate selling false information about client and co-defendants to government inmate witnesses)

FEDERAL CIVIL DISTRICT COURT CASES AND APPEALS

Costanza v. Jefferson Parish, 2017 WL 2731061 (E.D. La. 2017) (Client opposed defendant's Motion to Stay federal case pending resolution of State administrative proceeding where client was complainant in an employment matter; the court held that the staying the federal case was not warranted under abstention doctrine set forth in the Colorado River case)

Kurian David, et al. v. Signal International, LLC, et al., No. 08-1220 (E.D.La. 2015)
Nature of case: Human Trafficking (Labor), Civil RICO, Civil Rights Violations
Proceedings:  Represented one of several defendants from inception of case through a 5-week jury trial and post-trial motions
Disposition: Defeated plaintiffs’ request for class certification; At trial, lead defendant Signal International
was cast in judgment for $12.5M; Judgment imposed against client’s corporation, but not client, individually;

Defeated all of Signal International's cross claims against client.

Kurian David, et al. v. World Marine, et al., No. 15-30464 (5th Cir. 2015) (holding cross claims of Signal International (later "World Marine") against client and another co-defendant, as well as Signal International's claims for indemnity,
were properly dismissed by the district court)

Shell Offshore, Inc. v. Courtney, 2006 WL 1968926 (E.D. La. 2006) (unpublished) (holding that a stay of
discovery for one year in civil lawsuit against client/defendant under Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1962, was appropriate to protect client's Fifth Amendment
privilege against self-incrimination where client was a target of a grand jury investigation)

STATE COURT - APPEALS

​

Baldini v. East Jefferson General Hosp., No. 07-489 (La. App. 5 Cir. 1/22/08), 976 So.2d 746 (2008) (affirming Exception of Prescription granted by the district court and dismissing plaintiff's case)

Mathieu v. Imperial Toy Corp., 646 So. 2d 318 (La. 1994) (holding that the stealth manner in which police
officers approached suspect while attempting to disarm him was not negligent and thus client City of New Orleans, clients' employer, was not liable in respondeat superior)