State v. MJ, (Hillsborough County-2003): In 2000, U.S. Customs Officials in Anchorage, Alaska, intercepted a UPS package addressed to MJ's residence in New Hampshire. Although the shipping manifest indicated that the package contained Ketamine (tree bark), inspectors determined the package contained over 1 kg of Ketamine (“Special K”). Customs officials alerted Manchester-based DEA agents who subsequently notified the New Hampshire Drug Task Force. NHDTF made a controlled delivery of the package to MJ's residence, searched the residence, including MJ's computer. MJ was arrested and charged with attempted possession of a controlled drug (Ketamine) with an intent to sell subsequent and conspiracy to possess a controlled drug with the intent to sell subsequent. He remained free on bail pending trial. This was the biggest Special K bust in the state history. In addition, MJ had a prior drug conviction on his record. Each of these charges carried a maximum sentence of 7 1/2 — 15 years in state prison and a $200,000 fine. Not surprisingly, the senior assistant attorney general assigned to the case initially believed that at least 12 months in jail followed by intensive probation would be appropriate if MJ agreed to plead guilty to both charges. Over the course of almost a year of pretrial litigation, attorney Hansen filed multiple motions doggedly attacking the warrants and related searches in the case. In one of his last motions, attorney Hansen cited to an obscure case out of the state of Florida to support his client's legal position. To his credit, the senior assistant attorney general agreed to recommend a no-time deal after reviewing this final motion and the Florida case cited therein. During the plea and sentencing hearing that followed, the prosecutor referred to the issues raised by defense counsel as part of the rationale underlying the state's sentencing recommendation which did not include any stand committed jail time. MJ, his long-time girlfriend and 6-month-old baby were happy and grateful. Result: no jail time.
State v. AF, (Hillsborough County — 2003): AF was charged with felony criminal restraint, kidnapping, robbery and two counts of misdemeanor simple assault against his ex-girlfriend. The state's evidence appeared overwhelming. Initially, AF was represented by a public defender with over 20 years' experience who, not unreasonably, advised AF to accept a plea bargain. Attorney Hansen inherited the case. On the advice of counsel, as part of his trial strategy, AF took the rather unorthodox step of admitting to one of the misdemeanor simple assaults. After a three-day trial, the jury found AF not guilty of all charges except the simple assault he admitted to prior to trial. Result: not guilty.
State v. RH, (Carroll County — 2007): Attorney Albert Hansen represented RH who was accused of soliciting one inmate to assault another inmate while he was employed as a corrections officer. The prosecutor insisted on a felony plea even though the alleged victim was not seriously injured and RH had no criminal history. After a four-day trial, the jury found RH not guilty. RH subsequently sued the county and obtained a sizeable civil judgment for wrongful termination. Result: not guilty.
State v. RW, (Rockingham County — 2010): Attorney Al Hansen represented this 61-year-old grandfather who was charged with two counts of aggravated sexual assault and two counts of felonious sexual assault on his 7-year-old granddaughter. The two aggravated charges each carried a maximum sentence of 10 — 20 years in state prison. The other two charges each carried a maximum sentence of 3 1/2 — 7 years in state prison. RW, who had a criminal record, but no prior sexual assault convictions, would have spent the better part of the rest of his life in state prison if convicted. After a three-day trial, the jury found RW not guilty of all charges. Result: not guilty.
Learn More About Your Potential Outcome
DISCLAIMER: PAST RESULTS ARE NO GUARANTEE OF FUTURE RESULTS. EVERY CRIMINAL CASE MUST BE EVALUATED ON ITS OWN UNIQUE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. MANY FACTORS AFFECT THE RESULT OF A CRIMINAL CHARGE INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: THE ACCURACY OF ANY LAB RESULTS OR TESTS. WHETHER THE MACHINE CONDUCTING THE TEST WAS PROPERLY CALIBRATED AND CERTIFIED, WHETHER THE POLICE VIOLATED ANY STATE OF FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS, THE AVAILABILITY OF WITNESSES AT TRIAL, THE AVAILABILITY OF ARRESTING OFFICERS AT TRIAL, YOUR PERSONAL BACKGROUND AND PAST CRIMINAL RECORD, THE SPECIFIC PROSECUTOR AND JUDGE, THE AVAILABILITY OF DEFENSE WITNESSES AND NUMEROUS OTHER FACTORS.