Defending Against Texas DWI Charges: Strategies to Protect Your Rights
Facing driving while intoxicated (DWI) charges in Texas can be a distressing and overwhelming experience. A DWI conviction cRead More
May 6, 2017
For years Harris County Criminal Court Judges have systematically denied PR bonds. The judges’ actions have created untold hardships for Harris County’s poor.
Unable to make a surety bond and denied a PR bond, the poor find themselves locked up on non-violent misdemeanor charges. In court, the poor are given a Hobson’s choice. They can plead guilty and get out of jail sooner or they can fight their case and stay in jail longer.
No one likes to stay in jail, (notwithstanding the County’s patently absurd arguments to the contrary). So, the poor elect to plead guilty to get out of jail sooner. In our Harris County Criminal Courts the poor plead guilty to obtain their liberty. A system that requires poor people to plead guilty to obtain their liberty is a system of injustice.
For many years, We have asked the Harris County Criminal Court Judges to stop their systematic denial of PR bonds. With one recent exception, the judges have consistently ignored our entreaties.
After hearing weeks of testimony, Federal District Court Judge Lee Rosenthal has issued an injunction against the County. The injunction requires the County to immediately stop their systematic denial of PR bonds. Per Judge Rosenthal’s order, the County must immediately begin granting PR bonds.
Harris County has fought the injunction. According to the Chronicle, the County has already spent $2.85 million fighting this case. Now the County contemplates appealing Judge Rosenthal’s order.
Harris County Commissioners stand poised to approve the appeal. This is wrong and outrageous. Our Harris County Criminal Court Judges have perpetuated this unfair system for too long. Now they want to spend more of our tax dollars fighting to maintain their abusive system. The abuse of the poor by Harris county criminal courts must stop.
As they expect us to address them as “Your Honor”, they should act with honor. They should obey the Federal Court order and immediately stop the systematic denial of PR bonds. They should at long last abolish their foul “Plea Mill”.
It’s time for Justice to prevail in this fight. Harris County Criminal Courts have abused the poor far too long.
Robb Fickman , Houston, Texas
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.
Client, a Houston area professional who frequently travels for work, was accused by his wife of assaulting her in his family home. Defense showed that wife’s story lacked credibility and there was no physical evidence in support of the wife’s allegation.
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.
Client was retired professional. Client was accused of being involved in a road rage incident in 1960 Area. Defense put together a 100 page memorandum that demonstrated complainant was actual aggressor.
Client was accused of touching child. Case involved thousands of pages of psychiatric and Child Protective Services records as well as investigations by multiple police departments. After three- year fight, case dismissed.
Client accused of shoving and knocking down family member causing injury. After investigation, charges were dismissed.
Facing driving while intoxicated (DWI) charges in Texas can be a distressing and overwhelming experience. A DWI conviction can result in severe penalties, including fines, license suspension, mandatory ignition interlock devices, and jail time. A first offense driving while intoxicated …
Murder is one of the most serious crimes, carrying severe penalties, including the loss of liberty or even life. Given the serious nature of a murder allegation it is important that all potential defenses be zealously explored. Various defenses can …
When we think of trials, we often imagine a jury of our peers deliberating and reaching a verdict. However, the bench trial is another option in the Texas legal system. In a bench trial, the judge acts as the fact-finder …