Call 24/7 For A Free Consultation
Most people do not expect the Federal government to seize their property. Yet in Federal asset forfeiture cases, that is exa
Read MoreFamily violence charges are severe. The consequences can be long-term. If you are charged with a misdemeanor or felony famil
Read MoreForensic evidence can often play a significant role in determining a person’s guilt or innocence in criminal cases. Ho
Read MoreFor years in Harris County, Texas, indigent defendants were systematically denied personal recognizance bonds. As they were
Read MoreIf you or a loved one is charged in a Federal criminal case, it can be an incredibly challenging and stressful time. We alwa
Read MoreMost people do not expect the Federal government to seize their property. Yet in Federal asset forfeiture cases, that is exa
Read MoreFamily violence charges are severe. The consequences can be long-term. If you are charged with a misdemeanor or felony famil
Read MoreForensic evidence can often play a significant role in determining a person’s guilt or innocence in criminal cases. Ho
Read MoreFor years in Harris County, Texas, indigent defendants were systematically denied personal recognizance bonds. As they were
Read MoreIf you or a loved one is charged in a Federal criminal case, it can be an incredibly challenging and stressful time. We alwa
Read MoreMost people do not expect the Federal government to seize their property. Yet in Federal asset forfeiture cases, that is exa
Read MoreFamily violence charges are severe. The consequences can be long-term. If you are charged with a misdemeanor or felony famil
Read MorePosted by: Robert Fickman
Category: The Meaning of America by Robb Fickman
2-7-18
Friends-
The Fire Marshalls say the Family Law Center is unsafe. Given the many thousands of people who come through the FLC each month, it has become an extreme fire hazard.
The overcrowding at the Family Law Center, is caused by the same folks that caused the overcrowding at the Criminal Justice Center. Overcrowding at the FLC is caused by the County Criminal Court Judges and no one else.
The County Criminal Court judges mandate that the presumptively innocent accused appear for court approximately once a month. The judges make the accused come to EVERY Setting, including court settings where nothing is likely to occur. By mandating the frequent, unnecessary appearance of the accused at the FLC, The judges are personally responsible for creating the overcrowding and unsafe conditions.
Why do they do this? They do it for the same reason they systematically denied PR bonds. They do it to move their Dockets.
Making the accused come to court every 30 days, wears the accused down. People can only afford to miss so much work. So, after coming to court month after month, for no reason, people are far more likely to wave a white flag and plead guilty.
Causing the accused to come to the FLC every 30 days for court is creating overcrowding, just as it did at the Criminal Justice Center. There is one significant difference: Now the judicially-created overcrowding is endangering the lives of the accused, the lawyers and court staff.
There is an easy solution. The judges can fix the overcrowding overnight. All the County Criminal Court Judges need to do is waive the appearance of the accused at non-critical court settings. That would end the overcrowding at the FLC.
Will the County Criminal Court Judges do the right thing and waive the appearance of the accused at non-critical court settings? NO.
The judges will not waive the appearance of the accused, because that would take the pressure off of the accused to move/plead their cases. That would mean the Judge’s sacred dockets would not move as fast as they want them to move. The judges, apparently, would rather risk lives-our lives- than risk having their dockets not move as fast as they want them to move.
This is wrong.
Robb Fickman
Houston
https://m.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Houston-Fire-Marshal-sounds-the-alarm-on-12559168.php
The client, a Houston area medical assistant, was accused by her estranged husband of assaulting her in her family home. The defense showed that the complainant had a history of alcohol abuse and violence. The defense demonstrated that the police failed to conduct an adequate investigation of the initial charge, No charges should have ever been accepted.
The client believed to be facing potential Wire Fraud Charges related to SBA PPP loan applications. Investigation of applications for PPP loans and PPP forgiveness demonstrated that the Client had at all times acted in a lawful manner. Investigation demonstrated no fraud was committed by the client. Case closed.
Client was charged by Federal Indictment with making a social media post that threatened Malicious Damage and Destruction of a Building by Means of Fire and Explosives in violation of Federal law. The Defense showed that Client was a law-abiding citizen. The Defense further showed that the alleged threat was not made with any criminal intent.
The client, a public official with a long history of public service, was accused by a former girlfriend of engaging in non-consensual sexual relations. The Defense investigation and analysis showed through a detailed timeline that the allegation made absolutely no sense. Phone records, including calls and texts, were relied on to help establish an accurate timeline. The Defense met with law enforcement and reviewed a detailed package that exonerated the accused.
The client, a young Black male, was driving his car when police pulled him over for no apparent reason. It looked to be a profile stop. The client was accused of possessing a controlled substance in his vehicle. The Defense showed that there was no lawful basis for the police to stop the Client’s car. The Defense also showed that there was no lawful basis for the search of the Client’s car. It was a bad search, so the seized evidence was not admissible.
Client charged in Federal Indictment In “Operation Wrecking Ball” with 55 named co-defendants. Client faced seven charges. Client was charged with Conspiracy to Distribute Cocaine and Conspiracy to Engage in Money Laundering. Client was also charged with four counts of Distribution of Cocaine and one count of Money laundering.
Allegations involved client’s alleged use of his home to distribute cocaine. Government’s lengthy investigation involved numerous wiretaps, surveillance, video, pole cams, search warrants, vehicle stops and use of cooperating co-defendants.
Client went to trial with four remaining defendants. After a two-week trial, Judge granted Motion for Acquittal on four of the seven charges. Jury found Client Not Guilty of remaining three charges.
Client charged in Federal Court with two counts of Wire Fraud related to Five SBA EIDL loan applications. The Government alleged the client, a Houston professional, defrauded the Small Business Administration out of over $150,000. The Government also found the intended loss was over half a million dollars. The Client faced up to 20 years in prison on each count. The Defense investigated the case and negotiated a deal that included the Government not opposing a probation. The Federal Guideline calculation was for a prison sentence and the Probation Department recommended a prison sentence. Attorney Fickman submitted a 90 page Defense Sentencing Memorandum asking for Probation.
The client, a Houston area medical assistant, was accused by her estranged husband of assaulting her in her family home. The defense showed that the complainant had a history of alcohol abuse and violence. The defense demonstrated that the police failed to conduct an adequate investigation of the initial charge, No charges should have ever been accepted.
The client believed to be facing potential Wire Fraud Charges related to SBA PPP loan applications. Investigation of applications for PPP loans and PPP forgiveness demonstrated that the Client had at all times acted in a lawful manner. Investigation demonstrated no fraud was committed by the client. Case closed.
Client was charged by Federal Indictment with making a social media post that threatened Malicious Damage and Destruction of a Building by Means of Fire and Explosives in violation of Federal law. The Defense showed that Client was a law-abiding citizen. The Defense further showed that the alleged threat was not made with any criminal intent.
The client, a public official with a long history of public service, was accused by a former girlfriend of engaging in non-consensual sexual relations. The Defense investigation and analysis showed through a detailed timeline that the allegation made absolutely no sense. Phone records, including calls and texts, were relied on to help establish an accurate timeline. The Defense met with law enforcement and reviewed a detailed package that exonerated the accused.
The client, a young Black male, was driving his car when police pulled him over for no apparent reason. It looked to be a profile stop. The client was accused of possessing a controlled substance in his vehicle. The Defense showed that there was no lawful basis for the police to stop the Client’s car. The Defense also showed that there was no lawful basis for the search of the Client’s car. It was a bad search, so the seized evidence was not admissible.
Client charged in Federal Indictment In “Operation Wrecking Ball” with 55 named co-defendants. Client faced seven charges. Client was charged with Conspiracy to Distribute Cocaine and Conspiracy to Engage in Money Laundering. Client was also charged with four counts of Distribution of Cocaine and one count of Money laundering.
Allegations involved client’s alleged use of his home to distribute cocaine. Government’s lengthy investigation involved numerous wiretaps, surveillance, video, pole cams, search warrants, vehicle stops and use of cooperating co-defendants.
Client went to trial with four remaining defendants. After a two-week trial, Judge granted Motion for Acquittal on four of the seven charges. Jury found Client Not Guilty of remaining three charges.
Client charged in Federal Court with two counts of Wire Fraud related to Five SBA EIDL loan applications. The Government alleged the client, a Houston professional, defrauded the Small Business Administration out of over $150,000. The Government also found the intended loss was over half a million dollars. The Client faced up to 20 years in prison on each count. The Defense investigated the case and negotiated a deal that included the Government not opposing a probation. The Federal Guideline calculation was for a prison sentence and the Probation Department recommended a prison sentence. Attorney Fickman submitted a 90 page Defense Sentencing Memorandum asking for Probation.
Forensic evidence can often play a significant role in determining a person’s guilt or innocence in criminal cases. However, forensic evidence is not infallible and can sometimes be challenged.
In Houston, years ago, the Houston Police Department came under critical …
For years in Harris County, Texas, indigent defendants were systematically denied personal recognizance bonds.
As they were indigent, they could not afford to hire a bondsman. As they were systematically denied PR bonds, they remained in jail.
Ultimately, this led …
If you or a loved one is charged in a Federal criminal case, it can be an incredibly challenging and stressful time. We always fight and try to find a way to win the case. Nevertheless, after weighing the evidence, …
Notifications