Mr. Hartman has successfully obtained numerous acquittals, hung juries, and dismissals for many of his more than 2,000 clients since January 2008. Below is a short list of his many victories.
Mr. Hartman’s client was charged with PC 182 conspiracy to commit carjacking and assault with a deadly weapon; two counts of PC 664/215 attempted carjacking upon two different people; and three counts of PC 245 assault with a deadly weapon upon two different people. It was alleged that the client was driving a vehicle with three passengers and they confronted two strangers at different times on the road, at which time two of the passengers threw beer bottles at the other drivers and threatened to kill them and take their vehicles. It was also alleged that one of the passengers brandished a hand gun to one of the victims, and two of the passengers physically assaulted the other victim after the other victim stopped his car to ask what they wanted from him. However, the prosecution ignored any effort by Mr. Hartman insist that there was no agreement or intention by his client for either an assault or a carjacking to occur, and that both of these incidents were caused by the two passengers on their own when they were drunk and simply looking for a fight. The prosecution initially insisted on Mr. Hartman’s client going to prison for three years for the conspiracy charge. However, after the preliminary hearing when the two victims testified and were subjected to cross examination, the prosecution finally agreed that there was no evidence of Mr. Hartman’s client intended for any of the charged crimes to occur and that there was no evidence he intended to assist in any of the charges crimes to occur. As a result, the entire case against Mr. Hartman’s client was dismissed.
Client was charged with PC 211 robbery and PC 245(a)(4) assault with a deadly weapon. It was alleged that the client and two of his friends confronted a stranger on the street, the client hit the stranger in the head with a skateboard, and the three suspects took the stranger’s cell phone. However, the suspects were not detained at the scene of the crime and they were detained after having been picked out of a group of teenagers hanging out in a liquor store parking lot because they matched the generic description of young Hispanic males. Mr. Hartman’s client unfortunately was wrongfully picked out of the group as he was not present during the crime and only met up with the suspects in the liquor store parking lot. Despite the prosecution being told numerous times that they had charged the wrong person, and despite the victim even explaining that he did not recognize Mr. Hartman’s client and the client did not look like the suspect, the prosecution still pushed forward with the case and insisted on sending Mr. Hartman’s client going to prison. Finally, after standing strong in the face of the wrongful prosecution, Mr. Hartman’s client was dismissed from the case due to insufficient evidence of his involvement.
Mr. Hartman's client was charged with allegations of attempted robbery and residential burglary. Defense investigations revealed that Mr. Hartman's client was not a part of any criminal wrongdoing and was actually trying to discourage anyone else from committing any wrongdoing. The D.A. refused to acknowledge the truth of the defense investigations and insisted on Mr. Hartman's client being convicted of a strike. Because of Mr. Hartman's cross-examination of the alleged victim and the defense investigator's testimony, Mr. Hartman's client was completely dismissed from the case and released from all charges!
Mr. Hartman's client was charged with conspiracy to commit first degree murder and residential burglary, and was facing a potential sentence of at least 25-Life at just 18 years old. Defense investigations helped to show that the alleged victim was not credible in his allegations, and was actually engaged in his own severe criminal conduct. A doubt as to the alleged victim's credibility resulted in the murder conspiracy charge being dismissed in exchange for a plea bargain to only the residential burglary charge for 3 years to be served at half-time.
Mr. Hartman's client was prosecuted as a third strike offender with charges of attempted murder and gang allegations arising out of an incident that started as a fist-fight and turned into a shooting. Defense investigations helped to show that the alleged victim started the fight over his suspicion of client's brother being in a rival gang, and client's participation in the fight was only intended to protect his brother who had limited mobility from a previous leg injury. Doubt as to the alleged victim's credibility and doubt as to whether Mr. Hartman's client had the specific intent to commit murder resulted in a dismissal of the Life exposure because charges of attempted murder and all gang allegations were dropped in exchange for a plea bargain for simple felony assault.
Mr. Hartman and his private investigator Danny Davis worked tirelessly to follow every lead given to them to show that Mr. Hartman's client was falsely accused of first degree murder while at a party where a fight broke out. The investigative leads showed that someone else actually committed the shooting, and Mr. Hartman's client was wrongfully identified as the shooter. This doubt as to the witnesses' credibility in claiming it was Mr. Hartman's client resulted in a dismissal of the first degree murder case and his 18 year old client being released.
Mr. Hartman's client was prosecuted for charges of attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon, and robbery, all three of which carried gang enhancement allegations. These charges arose out of a robbery wherein Mr. Hartman's client agreed to be the get-away driver. When the robbery victim fought back, one of the robbers stabbed him multiple times in the upper torso including the heart. All of the robbers were charged with the same crimes as accessories. Mr. Hartman's cross-examination of the witnesses and police officers and arguments as to the accessory laws showed how it was not reasonably foreseeable for the get-away driver to know that one of the other robbers would stab the victim. The jury was deadlocked as to whether his client could be held responsible for attempted murder, which resulted in a MISTRIAL and a DISMISSAL of that charge.
Mr. Hartman's client was charged with residential burglary over 1.5 years after his fingerprints were supposedly discovered inside of a ransacked house. Mr. Hartman's motion to dismiss the case for violation of Due Process and Speedy Trial showed how the defense was prejudiced by the delay, during which time the authorities did absolutely nothing on the investigation. Motion granted; case DISMISSED.
Client charged with felony criminal threats for allegedly threatening to shoot his daughter, his brother, and then himself. Mr. Hartman's cross-examination of the brother who reported the alleged offense showed he was so unbelievable that anything he said was prone to dishonesty and fabrication. Jury agreed and found client NOT GUILTY of felony criminal threats.
Client charged with felony domestic violence after just being released from custody for a prior domestic violence conviction. Mr. Hartman's defense showed that the current alleged victim knew client would be swiftly arrested if she falsely reported a new domestic violence, and she used this in her manipulation of client to get her way. Jury agreed the alleged victim was not credible and found client NOT GUILTY.
Client charged with eight total counts of domestic violence, battery, assault, and criminal threats from two separate incidents against the same ex-girlfriend. Mr. Hartman presented fool-proof evidence of her committing perjury two separate times in this case. Jury agreed the alleged victim was a complete liar, and found client NOT GUILTY of eight total charges.
Client charged with domestic violence against her deputy sheriff boyfriend. Mr. Hartman presented a case of self defense, and showed how the boyfriend was the actual aggressor, and the boyfriend knew he could manipulate the system because of his status as a deputy sheriff. The jury agreed and found client NOT GUILTY of domestic violence.
Client charged with active participation in a criminal street gang. Mr. Hartman's cross-examination of the gang expert showed how they failed to conduct any real investigation and simply relied on blatantly false evidence, because the investigation notes actually showed client repeatedly denied gang membership. Gang charge DISMISSED for lack of probable cause.
Client charged with felony transportation of marijuana with intent to sell after a traffic stop revealed 13 pounds of marijuana in multiple containers in client's trunk. Mr. Hartman lodged a 4th Amendment challenge due to the officer committing an unjustified traffic stop for tinted windows. After the motion was granted, all evidence was suppressed against his client and the case was DISMISSED for lack of probable cause.
Client was charged with possession of heroin with intent to sell after multiple bags were found in client's car and pockets. Mr. Hartman lodged a 4th Amendment challenge based on an unjustified detention for stopping client at a gas station without legitimate suspicion of criminal activity. After the motion was granted, all evidence was suppressed against his client and the case was DISMISSED.
Client was charged with felony possession of illegal weapons and illicit substances after a search of client's mobile home. Mr. Hartman lodged a 4th Amendment challenge based on client's "consent" to search having been coerced with threats of arrest if he did not consent to a search. After the motion was granted, the evidence was suppressed and three felony charges were DISMISSED.
Client was charged with 2 counts of felony assault with a deadly weapon after allegedly slashing a knife towards his ex's new boyfriend and his brother. Mr. Hartman's cross-examination showed how the first alleged victim's version was so discredible in his details that the charge against him was DISMISSED for lack of probable cause.
Client was charged with felony criminal threats and use of a deadly weapon enhancement after allegedly holding a gun in the air and threatening to shoot his brother dead. Mr. Hartman's cross-examination showed how unreasonable and unbelievable the brother's allegation was, including glaring inconsistencies in his details, and the charges were DISMISSED for lack of probable cause.
Client charged with multiple counts of robbery each with use of deadly weapon enhancements and multiple counts of assault with a deadly weapon after allegedly holding his keys in his knuckles and punching 3 Wal-Mart loss prevention officers upon being detained for shoplifting. Mr. Hartman's cross-examination showed how client was simply trying to give the keys to his girlfriend so she could leave and the loss prevention officers were acting with excessive force in beating client so badly he required hospitalization. All allegations of using the keys as deadly weapons were DISMISSED for lack of probable cause.
Client charged with felony abuse on a dependent adult after allegedly using a flashlight to beat the alleged victim over the head. Mr. Hartman lodged a speedy trial violation challenge because the several year delay in prosecution resulted in substantial prejudice to the defense due to loss of witnesses and loss of memory by the witnesses. Motion granted; case DISMISSED.
Client was charged with felony possession of methamphetamine, felony fleeing the scene of an accident, and DUI after allegedly crashing into a vehicle on the exit-ramp of a highway and driving home. Mr. Hartman lodged a challenge for speedy trial violation because the several year delay in prosecution resulted in substantial prejudice to the defense due to loss of physical evidence and loss of witnesses. Motion granted; case DISMISSED.
Client charged with possession of methamphetamine with intent to sell after having suffered two prior convictions for selling methamphetamine. Mr. Hartman's defense showed that client had taken his girlfriend's drugs in order to destroy them so he could save her from her addiction. HUNG JURY 7-5 in favor of Not Guilty; MISTRIAL declared.
Client charged with felony assault with deadly weapon for using a knife to slash his much larger and meaner opponent during a fist fight. Mr. Hartman's self-defense case involved presenting the alleged victim's long history and wide-spread reputation for extreme violence, thereby showing client's reasonable fear that he needed a knife to defend himself against such a violent person. HUNG JURY 8-4 in favor of Not Guilty, MISTRIAL declared.
Client charged with felony grand theft from a bank after spending several thousand dollars that was deposited into his bank account by accident. Mr. Hartman presented a defense of client's good faith belief of client being entitled to the money. HUNG JURY 8-4 in favor of Not Guilty, MISTRIAL declared.
Mr. Hartman believes that every single person entering the court system—no matter the case or legal issue involved—needs the best representation possible. Mr. Hartman will assist every client by navigating through the complicated Rules of Evidence in both State and Federal Courts, and will fully research every legal issue in an effort to obtain the best result possible for each of his clients.
My brother was looking at a couple serious felonies. I contacted Jared after observing his success in a friends case. My family and myself consulted with Jared in regards to the years in prison my brother was looking at. After only three court appearances Jared was able to strike a plea deal and my brother plead to two non serious...
I first found Jared at a pretty low time in my life and I wasn't even certain I was in the market for a lawyer. A couple minutes into my first phone conversation with him and Bob Semnar, I knew I found the right team. I felt like I was talking with family. They never sugar-coated anything, but I never felt scared or worried because I had so much...
Jared is an exceptional Lawyer. He handled all aspects of our case providing very good advise. He knew what needed to be done and did it. Without his diligence and guidence throughout the process we would have been totally lost. I can honestly give him my highest recommendation.