A three count criminal Complaint and Information charged our client with possession to distribute narcotics, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §841(a)(1). The charges carried a minimum of at least 10 years in prison.
The postal inspector swore in his Complaint that he identified our client as mailing drugs from several post offices in San Diego to Tupelo, Mississippi. The postal inspector also opined that suspicious packages were associated with the client’s post office box and Tupelo, Mississippi. The postal service seized packages that contained the drugs and money sent to our client’s post office box. Because of the Compliant and seizures, the agents arrested him and seized more money, his computers and phones. The client’s former attorney suggested the client plead guilty and seek a lower sentence. However, the client wanted to fight the charges. As a result, the client hired Shaun Khojayan and his Firm.
Shaun and Aleen Khojayan began to review the large amounts of written and electronic discovery (evidence). We noticed that the videotapes of the alleged suspect at the post office did not match the defendant. Further, each of the warrants either misstated key evidence such as where the defendant’s fingerprints were found or omitted details about the drug canines’ reliability.
Before the Khojayan Firm filed its motions, the Assistant United States Attorney (the prosecutor) had only offered the client a guilty plea to the existing charges with a starting sentence of approximately 14 years in prison.
After months of review and preparation, the Firm filed multiple motions to suppress evidence obtained from the search warrants and a motion dismiss the compliant due to outrageous government misconduct in the false identification of the client. The postal inspector had omitted that the suspect in the videos wore masks, eyeglasses and, sometimes, a hoodie — making his alleged “positive” identification of our client, at a minimum, misleading.
In response, one month after the filing of the motions, the AUSA moved to dismiss the entire case with prejudice –meaning, without the possibility of re-filing the charges. The court granted the dismissal the next day without a hearing.
The case was over and the client was very happy. While on bail, he had started a trucking business. He was now free to live his life and continue his new business.
Click here to view PDF.
