If you have been accused of a crime, it may feel as though the odds are against you. The police, the FBI and possibly other government agencies may be investigating your case and gathering evidence that shows you committed the crime. Prosecutors are building a legal strategy designed to put you behind bars, fine you or punish you in other ways. There is one way to even the odds: Enlist an experienced criminal defense attorney.
Prosecutors do not offer a favorable plea agreement out of a sense of charity. Prosecutors are reasonable when they understand that a charge is not supported by evidence or where they feel uncertain about their ability to obtain a conviction at trial. However, if you are represented by a criminal defense lawyer who never takes cases to trial, the prosecution has no reason to be concerned. In short — you have no leverage.
At the Law Offices of Damon M. Cheronis, we fully investigate the facts of each case. We will dig into the allegations against you to try and uncover any false assumptions, contradictory information or even evidence that can be used in your favor. Where helpful, we have the ability to retain experts to uncover flaws in the prosecution's theory of the case. Remember, just because the prosecution claims to have a strong case to incriminate you, doesn't mean they actually do.
Contact the Law Offices of Damon M. Cheronis today if you need legal assistance with any of the following:
Call the Law Offices of Damon M. Cheronis today at 773-360-5948 to arrange your free initial consultation.
People v. MC
MC was arrested and charged with being an Armed Habitual Offender, Possession of Controlled Substance, Possession of Cannabis and several other weapons offenses. The charges carried a sentencing range from 6-30 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections. Chicago Police officers testified that as they were on patrol in a high crime area where a homicide had recently occurred, they observed MC and 3 individuals walking in the street. The officers claimed they smelled a strong odor of burning cannabis and that they approached the men for an interview. The officers also testified that they observed a "round" bulge in MC’s left jacket pocket that, based on their experience, suggested he may be carrying drugs. Once MC was stopped one of the officers conducted a pat down search of his left jacket pocket and felt what the officer thought was cannabis. A further search of MC allegedly revealed controlled substances and a hand gun. Mr. Cheronis filed a motion to suppress and argued that the stop and frisk of MC was illegal and that it violated M.C.’s rights under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. After an evidentiary hearing and testimony of both M.C. and the arresting officers, the court agreed and suppressed all the evidence recovered during the search. The state dismissed all the charges.
USA v. MM
MM was charged in a mortgage fraud/bank fraud for allegedly supplying false information to banks that resulted in loans that eventually went into default. MM pled guilty and at sentencing received a 6-month sentence despite the advisory guideline sentencing range that suggested a 21 to 27-month sentence.
USA v. JC
JC was indicted in the Northern District of Illinois for stealing sensitive information from the Federal Reserve while an employee. Mr. Cheronis successfully negotiated a misdemeanor disposition for JC that resulted in a fine and house arrest while avoiding jail time.
USA v. JD
JD was charged in the Northern District of Illinois with making threats online toward students at a college campus. The matter was resolved with a deferred prosecution.
USA v. MB
MB was charged in the Northern District of Illinois with being a Felon in Possession of a firearm. The crime carried a potential sentence of 10 years in prison. Prior to trial all charges against MB were dismissed.
USA v. LRG
LRG was charged in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois with Conspiracy to Possess and Distribute Cocaineas well as 3 separate counts of possessing cocaine with the intent to distribute. The charges carried a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years. The government alleged that LRG was a cocaine broker who set up at least 2 multi- kilogram deals between a buyer and a seller. The government received information from one of the men allegedly involved with the deals who was arrested and became an informant. The informant placed a recorded phone call to a man the government claimed was LRG to set up a large cocaine transaction. The DEA then set up surveillance on LRG's home and eventually searched and questioned LRG. The DEA testified at trial that LRG confessed 3 separate times to being the middle man for several multi-kilo cocaine deals. The government also introduced a recorded call that they alleged was LRG talking to their informant and GPS data that they claimed put LRG and the informant at the same location during alleged drug transactions. Mr. Cheronis and Mr. Hall represented LRG at trial. The jury returned NOT GUILTY verdicts on all counts.
Illinois v. MP
MP was charged with Solicitation of Murder for Hire as well as Class Super X drug charges with a potential sentencing range that included 20 and 15 year minimums in the penitentiary. The prosecution accused MP of hiring a hit man to murder a former employee over a business dispute. The alleged "hitman" was an undercover police officer. The charges also claimed that MP paid the undercover officer with kilograms of cocaine and molly for the hit. Mr. Cheronis was hired to represent MP and did so over the course of 3 years. After investigating the facts of the case, asserting an entrapment defense and litigating several motions on his client's behalf all of the charges were dismissed.