All Charges Dismissed on Day of Trial
Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon, Possession of a Firearm by a Street Gang Member
Client was accused of illegally possessing a loaded gun. Specifically, the client was accused of running from police who responded to a call of shots fired. The client was further accused of entering a home without permission and was allegedly witnessed by police tossing the loaded gun into a speaker box in an attempt to hide it. To make matters more serious, the police further accused the client of being a member of a Chicago Street Gang while illegally possessing the loaded gun. The Charges are broken down as follows: Possession of a Firearm by a Street Gang Member Class 2 Felony (3-10 Years IDOC) An individual convicted of this charge must serve at least 50% of their sentence before being eligible for Mandatory Supervised Release (Formerly Known as Parole) This charge is also NON-PROBATIONABLE A Class 2 felony is typically 3-7 years in the penitentiary. However, this offense is subject to an extended 3-10 years IDOC sentencing parameter due the nature of the charge resulting from the individual being a member of a Street Gang while illegally possessing a loaded firearm. Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon (AUUW) Class 4 Felony (1-3 years IDOC) An individual convicted of this charge must serve at least 50% of their sentence before being eligible for Mandatory Supervised Release (Formerly Known as Parole) This charge is also NON-PROBATIONABLE and individual must serve a mandatory sentence of 1 year in IDOC due to the nature of the charge. The client was also charged with multiple counts of AUUW predicated on the following theories: Did not possess a valid FOID (Firearm Owners Identification) card; Did not possess a valid Conceal and Carry License; Client was under 21 years old while in possession of the firearm; The theories were also predicated upon the client being on a public street and not in his own home. After entering the case, Attorney Jim DiQuattro immediately began analyzing the discovery and preparing the case for trial. After a review of the discovery, conducting extensive case law research and multiple meetings with the client, the case was set for trial. After multiple trial delays mostly attributed to the prosecution due to the absence of essential witnesses, mainly police officers, it was finally revealed that one of the police officers was suspended. Without this witness, the State’s case ultimately fell apart. After this fact was brought to the attention of the Judge, the Judge ordered the prosecution to provide further information as to the nature of the Officer’s suspension. The prosecution attempted to obtain a continuance. Attorney DiQuattro objected to the continuance and argued that the suspended officer was an essential prosecution witness. Attorney DiQuattro further eluded that the State would not be able to prove their case without this officer and noted the multiple trial delays in the case. As a result, the Judge denied the State’s motion for a continuance. After passing the case and conducting their inquiry, the case was recalled and the prosecution immediately DISMISSED ALL CHARGES and acquiesced they would not be able to prove their case. The client was ecstatic with this extraordinary result. Client was grateful for Attorney DiQuattro's, zealous and aggressive representation which exposed the weaknesses in the State’s case and ultimately resulted in dismissal of all the charges. The client was finally able to move forward with his life and was finally free of fear the potential lengthy prison sentence he was facing.