Commonwealth v. A.S. (Possession - Misdemeanor)

Commonwealth v. J.S. (Drug Charges)

Client was charged with:

35 780-113(A)(16) -2 counts of Prohibited Acts - Possession - Misdemeanors

35 780-113(A)(31) -1 count - Prohibited Acts - Misdemeanor

35 780-113(A)(32) -1 count Prohibited Acts - Misdemeanor

Facts of case according to the Criminal Complaint & Affidavit of Probable Cause:

An undercover plain clothes Detective was operating an unmarked police vehicle when he noticed an occupied vehicle sitting behind a gas station for over ten minutes.  When the vehicle pulled out, the Detective followed the vehicle until it pulled into a business and parked.  The Detective approached the passenger side window of the vehicle and noticed an open alcoholic beverage in the cup holder and a metal Marijuana smoking pipe on the front seat.  Detective then identified himself to driver/Client and placed him under arrest.  A bag located on the front seat contained a pill bottle which had several “Roaches” and loose suspected Marijuana.  Another bag was on the back seat, which contained a pill bottle having a small zip lock bag with a foil wrapped suspected LSD blotter(s), in addition to another plastic bag containing suspected Cocaine.  

Client came to Attorney Paletta for representation on this case.  Attorney Paletta & Client strategized a plan that involved Client achieving certain goals & accomplishments before his Preliminary Hearing to lessen the chances of jail time & reduce the risk of Felony Charges being added.  At the Preliminary Hearing before District Judge Blaschak, Attorney Paletta worked together with the Detective & the District Attorney to attempt to resolve this case in the best way possible for Client.  After discussing this with the Detective & District Attorney, Attorney Paletta felt that it would be best to ask for a continuance, which was Granted.  On the date of the following Preliminary Hearing, Attorney Paletta & Client achieved the following disposition:

WITHDRAWN 35 780-113(A)(16) -2 counts Prohibited Acts-Possession - Misdemeanors

WITHDRAWN 35 780-113(A)(31) -1 count - Prohibited Acts - Misdemeanor

WITHDRAWN 35 780-113(A)(32) -1 count Prohibited Acts - Misdemeanor

In exchange for ALL ORIGINAL CHARGES BEING WITHDRAWN, Client plead guilty to a SUMMARY DISORDERLY CONDUCT, which was moved to lower/Non-Traffic Court.

Commonwealth v. M.G. - (Preliminary Hearing - Drug Charges)

Commonwealth v. M.G. (Drug Charges - Preliminary Hearing)

Charge/Violation:      35 § 780-113 §§A16 - Prohibited Acts - Possession - (Misdemeanor)
                                35 § 780-113 §§A31 - Prohibited Acts - (Misdemeanor)
                                35 § 780-113 §§A32 - Prohibited Acts - (Misdemeanor)

                                                                   

Case Summary:

           

            Pittsburgh Police were called to Radio Shack to investigate a report made by an unidentified customer claiming that a man in a black shirt and green pants was stealing things. Upon their arrival, Officers asked the man (Client) to come to the front of the store to speak with them (the man was pointed out to Officers  by the store clerk). During interaction with the Officers, Client stated that he didn't take anything and put his arms up as gesture for them to look.

        Officers search the Client and find a small amount of marijuana in the left front pocket.  Officers also find a yellow unmarked pill bottle containing 18 pills of Alprazolam and a small black metal marijuana pipe. Client explained that he did in fact have a valid Rx for the pills but didn't have a copy of the Rx with him. Officers contacted poison control who verified that the pills inside the bottle were in fact Alprazolam. Officers found no stolen items on suspect's person.  Suspect was informed that he would receive a summons due to the small amount of marijuana, pipe and pills.

        Client retained Attorney Paletta for representation at his Preliminary Hearing in Pittsburgh Municipal Court. Attorney Paletta requested that Client provide a copy of the Rx prior to the Preliminary Hearing, and suggested that he begin some community service as a part of their defense strategy.

       

Disposition:

        At the Preliminary Hearing in Pittsburgh Municipal Court, an agreement was made that required Defendant to complete 20 hours of Community Service;  upon successful completion the charges would be Withdrawn.  The Judge then agreed to continue the Preliminary Hearing and follow up with a Status Conference in 30 days, at which time Attorney Paletta presented proof to the District Judge and to the Assistant District Attorney that Defendant had successfully completed the 20 hours of Community Service. The Assistant District Attorney agreed to a full Withdrawal of the case and the District Judge consented.

        THE CASE AGAINST DEFENDANT WAS WITHDRAWN and is now eligible for an Expungement.

Commonwealth v. J.G. (Preliminary Hearing - Simple Assault, Resisting Arrest, Drug Charges)

Commonwealth v. J.G.

(Preliminary Hearing - Simple Assault, Resisting Arrest, Drug Charges)

Mother of Defendant contacted Attorney Paletta upon learning that her son was charged with the following:

        18 § 2701 §§ A3 - Simple Assault - Misdemeanor 2

        18 § 5104  - Resist Arrest/Other Law Enforce - Misdemeanor 2

        35 § 780-113 §§ A31 - Poss Of Marijuana  - Misdemeanor

        35 § 780-113 §§ A32 M Use/Poss Of Drug Paraph - Misdemeanor

 

Outcome:

       Attorney Paletta gained the consent of the District Attorney and Police Officer to the following agreement: Defendant was to complete certain requirements and provide proof of completion. Upon successfully completing these requirements, and Defendant entering a Guilty Plea to a Summary Disorderly Conduct, which would be moved to lower court, all original charges would be Withdrawn.

                    Defendant completed all requirements. All four charges, (two Misdemeanor-2's and two Misdemeanors) were Withdrawn, Defendant plead guilty to a Summary Disorderly Conduct which was moved to a lower court-making the original charges Expungable.

Commonwealth v. D.M. - (Preliminary Hearing - Possession of Marijuana)

Commonwealth v. D.M. (Preliminary Hearing)

Charge/Violation:     35 § 780-113 §§A31 - Possession of Marijuana - (Misdemeanor)

                                35 § 780-113 §§A32 - Use/Poss of Drug Paraph - (Misdemeanor)

                                                               

Case Summary:

            Robinson Township Police served an Arrest Warrant on Defendant at Defendant's residence. Upon serving the Warrant, police allegedly observe a small water-bong and 4 small bags of Marijuana sitting in plain-view on a bedroom dresser. Defendant then states that the Marijuana and bong belong to him and signs a consent to search form. Officers search Defendant's bedroom and find no further contraband. Defendant contacted Attorney Paletta for representation.

Disposition:  

        At the Preliminary Hearing before District Judge Swearingen, Defendant entered a Plea Bargain to a Summary Disorderly Conduct offense which was moved to a lower court. The original charges that Defendant was charged with - two Misdemeanor - Possession charges, were WITHDRAWN and are now eligible for an Expungement.

Commonwealth v. M.B. - (Preliminary Hearing - Possession)

Commonwealth v. M.B. (Preliminary Hearing)

Charge/Violation: 35 § 780-113 §§A16 - Int Poss Contr Subst By Per Not Reg - (Misdemeanor)

                                                               

Case Summary:

            Pittsburgh Police charged Defendant with Possession of a Controlled Substance.  In fear of losing his job and causing problems in his career, Defendant contacted Lawyer Paletta for representation at the Preliminary Hearing of this case.

Disposition:  

        At the Preliminary Hearing in Pittsburgh Municipal Court, an agreement was made - that required Defendant to complete 25 hours of Community Service;  upon successful completion of all requirements, the charges would be Withdrawn.

        The Preliminary Hearing was continued and a Status Conference was to follow in 90 days. At the next Preliminary Hearing/Status Conference, Attorney Paletta presented proof to the District Judge and the Assistant District Attorney that Defendant had successfully completed the 25 hours of Community Service.  The Assistant District Attorney completed and submitted a full Withdrawal form to District Judge Ricciardi.

        THE CASE AGAINST DEFENDANT WAS WITHDRAWN and now eligible for an Expungement.

Commonwealth v. J.W. (DUI)

Commonwealth v. J.W. (D.U.I. Charges)

Client was pulled over by Coraopolis Police after traveling the wrong direction on Fourth Avenue. According to the Criminal Complaint, Officers noticed a strong odor of alcohol while speaking with Client.  Officers administered Field Sobriety Tests and Client was transported to Sewickley Valley Hospital for blood tests.

Client was charged with:

75§3802§§A1 - Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol  

75§3308§§B - One way roadways and Rotary Traffic Islands

Following the Preliminary Hearing before District Judge Mary P. Murray, Attorney Paletta requested that the District Attorney's Office consider Client for admission into the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (A.R.D.) Program.

At the Formal Arraignment, Client was offered admission into the A.R.D. Program.  Client accepted the terms and conditions of A.R.D., which were as follows:  12 months non-reporting probation, Drug & Alcohol evaluation, Safe Driving Classes, and a 60 day license suspension. With successful completion of all terms and conditions of the program, all charges Client was charged with are to be expunged.  There is no conviction or Guilty Plea to any charges, including the D.U.I.  

Commonwealth v. A.L. (Drug Charges)

Case Information:

Client came to Attorney Paletta upon receiving the following charges:

Misdemeanor - Possession of Controlled Substance By Person Not Reg.
Misdemeanor - Possession of Marijuana
Misdemeanor - Use/Poss. Drug Paraph.
Summary - Duties at Stop Sign
Summary - Disorderly Conduct

Disposition:

At the Preliminary Hearing of this case, the District Attorney offered Client The Expedited Disposition Plea (EDP) program.  Because Client would face problems with his employment if the case was not disposed of properly, Attorney Paletta attempted to negotiate a plea bargain to a Summary Disorderly Conduct instead of accepting the EDP offer.

The District Attorney agreed to a plea bargain of a Summary - Disorderly Conduct and all other charges were Withdrawn.

Client is working with Attorney Paletta to have this case Expunged from his record.

Commonwealth v. J.S. (Drug Charges)

Case Facts:

Client, a college student, was charged in Butler County with the following:
Misdemeanor - Marijuana-Small Amount-Personal Use
Misdemeanor - Use/Possession of Drug Paraph.
Summary - Disorderly Conduct.

If convicted of the above charges, client risked losing grants and scholarships awarded for education.

Disposition:

At the Preliminary Hearing, Attorney Paletta worked with the Assistant District Attorney and Police Officer to arrange the following plea bargain:

If Client agreed to undergo a Drug and Alcohol Evaluation and also agreed to follow through with any recommended treatment, the Misdemeanor Dug Charges would be Withdrawn and the Summary Offense would be moved to Non-traffic Court (a lower court).   After hearing the plea bargain, the District Judge agreed to postpone the case for a Status Conference in 60 days if Client provided proof of an evaluation and  any treatment that was completed as a result.  Client agreed and underwent an evaluation.

At the scheduled Status Conference, Attorney Paletta and Client provided the necessary proof to the District Judge, Assistant District Attorney and Officer.  The Misdemeanor charges were Withdrawn and the Summary offense was moved to Non-Traffic Court.

Client is now working with Attorney Paletta to have this case Expunged.

Commonwealth v. A.D. (Fair Evasion & Fraudulent Use or Removal of Registration Plate)

Commonwealth v. A.D.

(Fair Evasion & Fraudulent Use of Removal of Registration Plate)

Client, an out of state resident & commercial vehicle operator, retained Attorney Paletta after being charged with the following in Westmoreland County:

• 75§ 6110.1 §§ B - Fare Evasion - Affirmative Action - MISDEMEANOR 3
• 75§ 7124 - Fraudulent Use/Removal of Registration Plate - SUMMARY

 According to the Affidavit of Probable Cause, the State Trooper witnessed Client drive through an EZ - Pass lane on the Pennsylvania Turnpike without paying the fare or having an EZ Pass. Upon stopping the vehicle the State Trooper noticed that no licensed plate was affixed as require by law.

 Attorney Paletta & Client developed a case strategy that was successfully worked through. After discussion with the Trooper and the District Attorney assigned to the case, a Plea Bargain was made to a Summary Offense and all other charges were  DISMISSED.



Blog created by Aimee Peel, Paralegal to Attorney Paletta

Commonwealth v. C.P. (Assault, Resisting Arrest, Criminal Mischief)

Commonwealth v. C.P. (Assault, Resisting Arrest, Criminal Mischief)

Client in this case was a younger hard-working individual supporting a family, who had a clean record.  Client was allegedly involved in certain incidents which led him to be charged with the following:

Criminal Mischief - M3

Resisting Arrest - M2

Recklessly Endangering Another Person - M2

Aggravated Assault - F2

Simple Assault - M2

CASE DISPOSITION :  

Attorney Paletta & Client worked together to develop a strategy for this case which was followed very closely by Client.  After many discussions with the Assistant District Attorney assigned to this case, Attorney Paletta was able to  have certain charges (those  charges restricting Client from entering into the A.R.D. Program) Withdrawn.  Client was accepted into  the A.R.D. Program.  After all terms and conditions of the program are successfully completed, this case will automatically be Expunged by the Court. and client’s record will remain clean.

Com. v. M.J., R.N.

Com v. M.J., R.N.

Attorney Paletta represented Client, a Nurse employed at Uniontown Hospital, relating to an Investigation of suspected drug diversion.   Client was charged with numerous Felonies for accusations of diverting liquid Hydromorphine (Dilaudid), liquid Morphine, amd Lorazepam (Ativan) from the hospital where she was employed.  

 

The Investigation began when Uniontown Hospital Police recieved information from the Director of Pharmacy of the Uniontown Hospital, that Client was suspected of diverting narcotics from the hospital after noticing discrepencies with the inventory of the narcotics dispensing machine “Rxstation” between Client’s shifts. These discrepencies were under Client’s usuage account.

 

Charges as listed in Criminal Complaint include:
 

1. 35 780-113(A)(12) -- Prohibited Acts - Felony (8 counts)
2. 35 780-113(A)(12) -- Prohibited Acts - Felony (7 counts)
3. 35 780-113(A)(12) -- Prohibited Acts - Felony (1 count)

CASE DISPOSITION :  

Charges at 35 780-113(A)(12) were Amended to Simple Possession of a Controlled Substance and the original charges under Subsection 12 were Dismissed.

Commonwealth v. L.V. (Summary Trial)

Commonwealth v. L.V.

Charges:      1 Count – 18§5503§§A4 - Disorderly Conduct Hazardous/Physi Off – Summary

                          

Facts:         Client, a College Student residing on campus at the University of Pittsburgh,who is a Senior in the Pitt Engineering program was charged by Officers of the Hanover Township Police Department with a Summary Disorderly Conduct while attending a concert at the First Niagara Pavillion (formerly Star Lake).  

The following business day Client contacted our office to inquire about what can be done.  Upon calling, Client spoke with Attorney Paletta’s Paralegal Aimee.  Client expressed his concern about this situation causing problems with his education and future. Aimee scheduled an immediate, same day consultation.  Client’s next steps were to plead Not Guilty to the citation and request a Summary Trial date, which he did do.  Client retained Attorney Paletta for this matter.         

                        Attorney Paletta and Defendant worked together to compose a defense strategy that would work towards achieving an outcome acceptable to Defendant and one that would not cause problems for his education and future if followed through properly successful.         

Disposition          Client worked closely with our office to follow the drawn out defense strategy.  At the Summary Trial, Attorney Paletta was able to gain a full Withdraw of the case and the Summary Disorderly Conduct Client was charged with was Withdrawn. Having this type of disposition allows for Client’s record is to be completely expunged if a Petition for Expungement is filed with the County Clerk of Court’s Office and Granted by a Common Pleas Judge. Client was extremely happy with end result.

Com. v. K.H.

Com v..K.H.

Attorney Paletta represented Client, who was in the process of completing his Medical Residency.  Client was charged with Tampering Physical Evidence - a Misdemeanor 2, Prohibited Acts (Possession of Marijuana) - a Misdemeanor, Disord. Conduct - a Summary, and Public Drunkeness - a Summary offense.

Attorney Paletta and Client worked together to compose a strategy that if properly followed, would assist in achieving an outcome that would not have a negative impact on Client’s career/education.

CASE DISPOSITION :  

Client followed the strategy/gameplan and provided proof toAttorney Paletta .  Attorney Paletta used that proof to negotiate a deal with the District Attorney. and managed to get the entire case (ALL CHARGES)  Dismissed...this makes the case eligible for an Expungement, which is very important for Client’s future.

Com. v. J.R. (Careless Driving)

Com v..J.R. (CARELESS DRIVING)

Attorney Paletta represented Client who was charged with Careless Driving.  Before contacting Attorney Paletta, Client plead Guilty to this traffic offense, but was not aware that he would lose his license if he did so.  Client received notification of suspension from PennDot & immediately contacted Attroney Paletta.  A license suspension for Client meant that he would also lose his job.

 Since Client had already plead Guilty, and the 30 day appeal period was up, Attorney Paletta filed a Nunc Pro Tunc Petition with the Court requesting permission to file an untimely appeal of Client’s Guilty Plea.  Attorney Paletta’s Petition was Granted and an Appeal of Client’s Guilty Plea was immediately filed.  A Summary Conviction Appeal, Hearing was schedued before Judge Gallo of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas.

CASE DISPOSITION :  

Attorney Paletta negotiated a plea bargain with the State Trooper to a lesser charge of Violation of Vehicle Equipment Standards and the original Careless Driving charge Dismissed.  This meant no Driver’s License Suspension for Client. & no loss of job!!

Commonwealth v. J.D. (Drug Charges)

Com v.J.D. (Drug Charges)

Client charged with numerous drug crimes.   
Attorney Paletta represented Client at the Preliminary Hearing of this case.

CASE DISPOSITION :  

All Misdemeanor Drug Charges WITHDRAWN - & now eligible for Expungement.
Client entered a Guilty plea to a lower offense:  Summary Disorderly Conduct and case was moved to a lower court: Non-Traffic Court.   

Case Closed at Preliminary Hearing level.

In Re: R.M., Petitioner (Petition for Expungement of Juvenile 302/303 Civil Commitment)

In Re:  R.M., Petitioner

(Petition for Expungement of Juvenile 302/303 Civil Commitment)

Client came to Attorney Paletta seeking an Expungement of  an Involuntary Commitment that occurred when he was a juvenile.  Client explained that having this on his record was causing problems with his education and employment opportunities.

Attorney Paletta filed a Petition with the Court, and got a hearing date scheduled.  In the time leading up to the hearing, Attorney Paletta had numerous teleconferences with the Representative from the Pennsylvania State Police and the Attorney for the Commonwealth, who would both be attending the hearing.  Attorney Paletta & Client developed a strategy that included accomplishing certain tasks and having proof of those tasks or the Hearing.  Client successfully completed his tasks and provided proof at the Hearing.  

    Client’s Petition was presented on the day of the hearing  as well as proof of the tasks he completed.  All in all, everything seemed to go well and in a positive direction.  The Judge decided to take the Petition and argument under advisement and rule  on the case at a later date, which has not yet occurred.  

Commonwealth v. C.W. (Expungement of Summary Convictions)

Client, an out of state resident, contacted our office when convictions of Summary Charges from 2001 were causing problems for him in his profession.  Client stressed the urgency of having these removed from his record.

Attorney Paletta filed a Petition for Expungement of Summary Convictions with the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas.  The Petition was Granted and the case was removed from Client’s record.

Commonwealth v. S.F. (2 Possession w/ Intent to Deliver Cases)

Commonwealth v. S.F. (2 Possession w/ Intent to Deliver Cases)

A fellow Attorney who represented Client at his Preliminary Hearings of these 2 drug cases, contacted Attorney Paletta to discuss Client’s situation & the possibility of having Attorney Paletta represent Client at the prosecution of these 2 cases.  

Following teleconferences & meetings, this Client retained Attorney Paletta for both of his drug cases.  

Case #1 -

Charges Include the following:  

Prohibited Acts: Possession with Intent to Deliver - Schedule I-IV (Two Bundles of white small envelopes commonly used for packaging Heroin. - 47 individually wrapped bags of Heroin)
Numerous other Prohibited Acts
Possession of a Controlled Substance
Driving while Oper. Priv. suspended or revoked
Operation of vehicle without official certificate
 

Case #2 -

Charges Include the following:  

Prohibited acts- Possession with Intent to Deliver - Schedule I-IV (124 empty stamp bags of heroin)
Numerous other Prohibited Acts, T
amper with/Fabricate Physical Evidence

Client was charged with both of the above cases from two different alleged incidents both being on different dates, and both by different arresting agencies.

Attorney Paletta managed to get both cases scheduled before the same Judge & with the same District Attorney so they could both be heard at the same time.  

Attorney Paletta and the District Attorney worked together to come up with a plea that Client was happy with, and which no jail time was involved.  

Client received PROBATION for a plea on two Possession with intent to deliver (P.W.I.D.) cases.