When Charged With a Crime ®

An Evening with Coach Rob Mendez at Above Ash Social in Little Italy (downtown San Diego)

Since 2010, our Firm has consistently been committed to creating a positive and lasting impact, beyond excellence in criminal defense, to the San Diego community. From sponsoring charity events to raising funds for Second Chance and other organizations, to providing educational scholarships, we remain committed to giving back to the people of San Diego.

In furtherance of our mission, the Firm is sponsoring “An Evening with Coach Rob Mendez” on Thursday, June 2, 2022, at 6pm at Above Ash Social in Little Italy. Rob is a football coach and author who has been featured in a number of national TV shows, as well as an ESPN documentary, on how he has chosen faith over fear, and opportunity over limitation.

For those who don’t know, Rob was born with no arms or legs as the result of a rare disorder known as tetra-amelia syndrome. Rob is an inspiration in that he has never let his physical condition limit his passion for coaching football. Join us if at our event on June 2, which we trust will provide inspiration to all of us in pursuing our own goals and inspire others to do likewise. All proceeds will go to Coach Rob to help out with his ongoing medical costs.

It’s a common question: If my accuser does not come to court and testify in my case, can I still be convicted? As noted in this video by Managing Partner David P. Shapiro, the answer is usually “no.” However, a recent case in Idaho demonstrated that this is not always the case.

The Idaho case involved the prosecution for the alleged sexual abuse of a young woman by a former Idaho state representative. The woman was a legislative intern at the time. The defendant did not deny that the two had sexual relations, but insisted that it was consensual. During the presentation of the case by the prosecutor, the woman was called to testify. But after she began her testimony, she appeared visibly upset, said she could not continue, and abruptly ran off the witness stand. Since this happened during her direct examination by the prosecutor, the defense had no opportunity to cross-examine her. Allowing the partial testimony into evidence would have violated the confrontation clause contained in the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which guarantees a criminally accused the right to cross-examine witnesses against them. When David was approached by the Daily Beast for comments on the case, he, as well as many other criminal defense lawyers, anticipated that the defendant would likely be acquitted. But that is not what happened, as the jury returned a guilty verdict against the disgraced Idaho state representative.

The judge sought to cure the issue by instructing the jury to disregard all of the woman’s testimony. Whether the jury was swayed by the statements of a nurse who testified on behalf of the prosecution, and/or by the testimony of the alleged victim’s mother (relating to her daughter’s behavior after the encounter), the jury’s verdict surprised many. There is always the possibility, of course, that the jury chose to disregard the judge’s instructions, and considered the partial testimony of the complaining witness, which could get the conviction overturned, if it can be proven.