Miscellaneous

*NOTE: The below should not be construed as a promise or guarantee of similar results. Results will vary depending on the particular facts and legal circumstances of each individual case.

State v. K.S. - Client was charged with felony offenses connected with the death of her young son and the subsequent alleged cover-up of the offense. Ms. Denholtz successfully litigated a motion to suppress the client’s statements to the police. Ms. Denholtz showed the court that the client was held against her will in a hospital waiting room for 4-5 hours, and then brought to the police station. At the police station the client repeatedly stated to police that she did not want to speak to them because she was not in the right headspace, having just lost her son and been separated from her young daughter. Based on Ms. Denholtz’s arguments, the court found that the police should have ended the interview once the client invoked her right to silence. The Court suppressed significant parts of K.S.’s statements.

State v. C.H. – At 17-years-old, C.H. was arrested and subsequently convicted of felony-murder committed during the course of a robbery, conspiracy to commit robbery, and assault. C.H. and two others hatched a plan to rob two local drug dealers. During the course of the robbery, a 17-year-old C.H. panicked fired two shots into a motor vehicle, killing one of the drug dealers and wounding the other.  Ms. Denholtz entered the case several years after sentencing.  Ms. Denholtz conducted extensive investigation into client’s background and history and put together a comprehensive application for C.H.’s early release from prison on parole. Ms. Denholtz illustrated to the parole board that C.H.’s chaotic and unstable childhood led him to a life in the streets where he turned to selling drugs in an effort to support himself. Ms. Denholtz also illustrated for the parole board C.H.’s considerable growth, maturity, and rehabilitation, as well as C.H.’s deep empathy and remorse for the permanent damage his crimes caused. Ms. Denholtz illustrated how C.H. had grown and matured from a reckless, impulsive, and troubled teenager, into a kind, compassionate and responsible man. Ms. Denholtz showed that C.H. had come to understand that his reckless, impulsive , and tragic actions on the date of his crimes forever altered the lives of his victims and their families. At the time of the application, C.H. had served 20.5 years in prison. Ms. Denholtz obtained an expert evaluation of C.H., which showed that C.H. was at a very low risk to re-offend.  Ms. Denholtz also showed the parole board the client’s extensive rehabilitation and dedication while in prison in the form of educational classes, programming, and employment. Ms. Denholtz showed the role board that throughout his incarceration, C.H. earned his high school diploma, a number of certificates, completed a range of programs, and held several work positions at the prison.  Ms. Denholtz also provided the parole board with a comprehensive re-entry plan for C.H. which included proof of support of family, involvement in the church, and employment.  C.H. was released on parole as a result of this advocacy.

State v. C.P. – As part of an ongoing investigation into the illegal sale of firearms in New Jersey, Ms. Denholtz’s Client was charged with 19 serious felony-level offenses related to possession and trafficking firearms (i.e., 3 counts of Unlawful Possession of a Handgun (2nd degree); 3 counts of Certain Persons not to Have a Weapon (2nd degree); 1 count of Manufacturing/Transporting Firearms (3rd degree);  1 count of Unlawful Possession of Rifles/Shotguns (3rd degree); 1 count of Possession of a Firearm Without a Serial Number (3rd degree); 4 counts of Possession of Prohibited Ammunition (4th degree); and 4 counts of Defacement of Ammunition/Weapon (4th degree)).  Altogether, C.P. was facing a maximum of 94 years in prison.  Ms. Denholtz successfully negotiated a plea to just 1 of the 19 offenses to which the client was accused, and was able to negotiate a sentence of 5 years in prison with a 3.5 month parole disqualifier.  This resolution ensures that the client will spend the absolute minimum time in custody under the very severe circumstances of this case.

State v. A.C. - Client was charged with dozens of 1st, 2nd , 3rd, and 4th degree offenses related to numerous robbery and carjacking offenses for events spanning 5 counties in New Jersey over a period of several weeks.  A.C. was facing potentially hundreds of years in prison.  The proofs against the client were strong, so Ms. Denholtz knew she could best help the client by negotiating the best possible resolution that resulted in the least amount of time in custody for the client.  Ms. Denholtz successfully negotiated a resolution of 10 years in prison (subject to NERA) to be served concurrently (meaning at the same time) as sentences he received in other counties.  While this was a hefty state prison sentence, this absolutely was a success for the client who was otherwise facing a potential aggregate term that would have effectively been a life sentence in prison.  The client was very young and had his whole life ahead of him.  We did not want the client’s entire life to be ruined for what amount to extremely poor judgment of a youthful offender.  After 8.5 years in prison, the client will be eligible for release and free to start his life again.