cta

Aggressive and Thorough Representation
in Immigration, Criminal & Family Law

Recent Victories for Trupiano Law in Criminal Defense

Salt Lake area law firm, with highly successful practice in immigration and criminaljuvenile defense

If you are looking for a criminal defense and/or immigration defense lawyer for yourself or a loved one, you want positive results. We agree in that objective and aggressively pursue the best possible results for our clients.

Below is a list, which is not all inclusive, of representative cases involving clients who were charged with criminal offense, ranging from controlled substanceviolations, to sex crimes to domestic violence and assault to white collar and RICO crimes.

Trupiano Law Obtains Full Dismissals of Criminal Matters

J. J. – Case No. 2:07CR00115, United States District Court, District of Utah –
Mr. J. was threatened with being charged as a co-conspirator for

  • Mail Fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341,
  • Securities Fraud, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 78j(b), 78ff; 17 C.F.R. § 240.1 0b-5; 18 U.S.C. § 2; and
  • Sale of Unregistered Securities in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 77e, 77x; 18 U.S.C. § 2.

Trupiano Law worked with the prosecution and the FBI to ensure that Mr. J was never actually charged as a co-conspirator.

D. F. -Case No. 2:04CR00666-TG, United States District Court, District of Utah –
Mr. F. was charged with

  • Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a),
  • Aiding and Abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2.

Ms. Trupiano worked with the defense attorney Ronald Yengich to draft a motion to suppress and memorandum of law for this case. The suppression arguments included that Mr. F was in a per se custodial detention where the officer accompanied him to his bedroom while he dressed after having just gotten out of the shower. Judge Thomas Greene granted the motion to suppress so the charges were dropped.

D. S. – Case No. 041906368, Second Judicial District, Weber County
Ms. S was charged with

  • Illegal possession/use of a controlled substance, 3d felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(2)(A)(i).

Ms. Trupiano was retained to assist the defense attorney to draft a motion to suppress and memorandum of law. Based on Ms. Trupiano’s motion, all charges in this matter were dropped by the prosecution.

C. A. – Case No. 081905193, Third Judicial District, Salt Lake County
Mr. A was charged with

  • Illegal possession/use of a controlled substance, a third degree felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(2)(A)(i).
  • Illegal possession/use of a controlled substance, Class B misdemeanor, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(2)(A)(i).

Trupiano Law obtained a full dismissal of all charges. Trupiano Law conducted a thorough defense investigation, including subpoenaing the dash cam of the traffic stop. She brought to the attention of the State the mistakes the police officer had made – as to easy grounds of suppression. The State agreed to move to dismiss all charges where the defense had would have prevailed in a motion to suppress all evidence.

J. P. – Case No. 075004138, Third Judicial District, Murray Justice Court
Trupiano Law obtained full dismissal of speeding charge against Mr. P. who is a commercial over-the-road truck driver with a CDL. If convicted, Mr. P. would have been terminated from his job as a truck driver where he had two previous moving violations in the last three years on his MVR.

G. B. – Case No 081100249, Fourth Judicial District, American Fork
Trupiano Law obtained a full dismissal of all charges, consisting of criminal mischief and assault. Trupiano Law conducted a thorough defense investigation, including interviewing with the defense witnesses and gathering defense evidence to present. The day of trial, the City moved to dismiss where the defense had developed a strong enough case that the City felt it could not prevail at trial.

M. T. – Case No. 071603060, Third Judicial District, Salt Lake County
Trupiano Law obtained a full dismissal of all charges, consisting of domestic violence assault. Trupiano Law conducted a thorough defense investigation, including interviewing with the defense witnesses and gathering defense evidence to present. The day of trial, the plaintiff moved to dismiss where the defense had developed a strong enough case that the City felt it could not prevail at trial.

R. G. – Case No. 065005954, Third Judicial District, Murray Justice Court –
Trupiano Law obtained a full dismissal of all charges, consisting of reckless driving and causing an accident. Trupiano Law conducted a thorough defense investigation, including interviewing with the defense witnesses and gathering defense evidence to present. The day of trial, the City moved to dismiss the defense had developed a strong enough defense that the City felt it could not prevail at trial.

K. E. – Case No. 071404214, Fourth Judicial District, Utah County
Ms. E, an international student from Kenya, Africa, was charged with:

  • Identity Fraud, 2d Felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-1102 and
  • Theft, 2d Felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-404.

Trupiano Law obtained full dismissal of all charges where Trupiano Law filed a motion to dismiss with memorandum of law and exhibits in addition to subpoenaing complainant’s records. The case was subsequently dismissed by request of prosecutor Chad E. Grunander who confirmed it was based on grounds raised in Trupiano Law’s motion to dismiss.

R. S. – Case No 081700416, Second Judicial District, Davis County
Mr. S, a native and citizen of South Africa, who was in the United States on a student F-1 visa, was charged with

  • Theft, a Class A misdemeanor, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-404.

Trupiano Law obtained a full dismissal of this case where Mr. S, a citizen of South Africa, was wrongfully charged with theft, a class A misdemeanor.

K. E. – Case No. 081400019, Fourth Judicial District, Utah County
Ms. E, an international student from Kenya, Africa, was charged again with a second matter involving:

  • two counts of Identity Fraud, 3d Felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-1102, and
  • one count of Theft, 2d Felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-6-404.

Trupiano Law obtained full dismissal of all charges where it filed a successful motion to dismiss with memorandum of law and exhibits in addition to subpoenaing complainant’s records. The case was subsequently dismissed by request of prosecutor Chad E. Grunander who confirmed it was based on grounds raised in Trupiano Law’s motion to dismiss.

Trupiano Law Obtains Positive Client Objectives in Criminal Matters

J. L. – Case No. 051400419, Third District Court, W. Jordan
Mr. L was charged with

  • Illegal possession/use of a controlled substance, 3d felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(2)(A)(i).

Ms. Trupiano was retained by the defense attorney to draft a motion to suppress and memorandum of law. Based on that, the prosecutor was willing to make a better offer of plea in abeyance, amend the charge to attempt, class A misdemeanor, probation only, no jail. This offer satisfied Mr. L who accepted the offer, which was a vast improvement to the initial offer that stood prior to the motion to suppress being filed.

J. S. – Case No. 071701150, Second District Court, Farmington –
Mr. S was charged with

  • Ten counts of Sexual Exploitation of a Minor, 2d felonies, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-5A-3.

Ms. Trupiano obtained a dismissal of eight out of the ten counts. Ms. Trupiano rallied friends and family together of Mr. S to write letters. She sought a favorable psycho-sexual evaluation of her client. Finally, Ms. Trupiano filed a Motion for Sentencing Leniency, attaching numerous supportive exhibits of the mitigating factors. Mr. S was ultimately sentenced to one year in custody where he had otherwise faced a maximum of 150 years under Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-203 if found guilty of all ten counts and 30 years if the judge had not found sufficient mitigating factors for the two counts he pled to.

D. O. – Case No. 07CR15379, Third Judicial District, Salt Lake City Justice Court
Trupiano Law sought a recall of the wrongfully issued warrant for Mr. O. which the court granted. Mr. O was charged with Driving under the Influence (“DUI”). Trupiano Law obtained a Class B Misdemeanor alcohol restricted reckless. Trupiano Law was able to quash a second warrant that was wrongfully issued while Mr. O. was on probation and full exoneration of Mr. O.

K. H. – Case No. 041907614, Third Judicial District, Salt Lake County
Trupiano Law obtained third reinstatement of probation (for prior conviction of robbery, 3d felony) where Mr. H. had been convicted of new charges while on probation of possession of methamphetamine and a firearm while a convicted felon and on probation. State had sought Mr. H.’s revocation of probation and wanted to send him to prison for at least five years in prison. Mr. H.’s probation was reinstated again and he was admitted to the treatment program of his choice.

J. H. – Case No. 071904731, Third Judicial District, Salt Lake County
Mr. H was charged with:

  • one count of Sex Abuse of a Child, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-404.1, a 1st Degree Felony.

The maximum possible sentence is a mandatory minimum of 15 years to life. Trupiano Law conducted an extensive defense investigation, including numerous motion for subpoenas of private records, including obtaining: (1) the alleged victim’s medical records by ordered subpoena, (2) previous reports filed by the alleged victim and her family to Department of Children and Families Services (“DCFS”) to demonstrate a pattern of false claims; (3) police incident reports of the addresses where the State witnesses had been residing to find basis for bias or impeachment or pattern of making false claims; (4) background checks of all State witnesses, including police officers, to show bias and impeachment. Trupiano Law took pictures of the scene and had an investigator interview witnesses. Mr. H accepted the State’s offer soon before trial of a Second Degree Felony with recommendation for no prison. Mr. H was not sentenced to any prison and received probation.

D. H. – Case No. 061902964, Third Judicial District, Salt Lake County
Mr. H was charged with

  • Illegal possession/use of a controlled substance, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(2)(A)(i), a 2d Degree Felony.
  • Failure to stop or respond at command of police officer, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 41-6A-210, a 2d Degree Felony;
  • Failure to stop or respond at command of police officer, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-8-305.5, a Class A Misdemeanor;
  • Obstruction of justice, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 76-8-306, a 3rd Degree Felony.

Trupiano Law obtained favorable sentencing of 90 days in jail where State sought five years in Utah State prison. Judge McCleve had indicated she intended to sentence Mr. H. to prison as well. However, due to Trupiano Law’s Motion for Sentencing Leniency and attached exhibits, J. McCleve sentenced Mr. H. to 90 days in jail and placed him on three years probation. Defendant had previously pled to possession of controlled substance, amended to 3d felony, and failure to stop to command of police officer, Class A misdemeanor when represented by other counsel.

M.O. – Case No. 2:07CV00320, United States District Court, District of Utah –
M.O. was accused by the plaintiffs of hiring numerous alien farm workers without duly compensating them. Trupiano Law, with its unique knowledge of immigration law, represented the defendant M.O. as local counsel where the parties were able to reach an amicable resolution.

A. E. – Case No. 051908895, 061400223, Third Judicial District, Salt Lake City District Court –
Mr. E was charged with

  • Multiple counts of violating probation under Utah Code Ann. § 77-18-1(12), class A misdemeanor.

Mr. E was charged with violating his probation on several matters. Trupiano Law successfully argued against a finding of violation of probation. The condition of probation was that Mr. E was supposed to leave the country after he was sentenced. Trupiano Law filed a Defendant’s Opposition to Order to Show Cause, arguing that as a matter of law the Utah State criminal court judge does not have the authority to order an alien removed and thus, failure to leave the State could not be a legitimate condition of probation in the first place. Furthermore, an immigration judge had ordered Mr. E to attend his immigration hearings in Utah State, thus, Mr. E could not have willingly violated the conditions of probation where he was following the orders of the immigration judge. Mr. E was exonerated of the charges of violating probation in these matters based on Trupiano Law’s advocacy.

S. V. – Case Nos. 084900454, 084900455, 084900464, Third District, Salt Lake City1
Mr. V was the victim of three simultaneous filings of petitions for protective order against him. Ms. Trupiano set the matter for an evidentiary hearing and after three weeks of preparation was able to demonstrate that the petitions were without merit. Ms. Trupiano had called many witnesses and brought verified documentation to challenge the false allegations against Mr. V. All three petitions were dismissed that day.

E.K. – Case No. 084905417, Third District, Salt Lake City –
Mr. V was the victim of a meritless petition for protective order against him. Mr. V’s wife had just arrived to the United States a year before as a conditional permanent resident. Since Ms. Trupiano also practices immigration law, she was able to demonstrate to the commissioner the foreign wife’s motive to obtain a protective order under the Violence against Women Act (“VAWA”) provisions. See e.g., INA § 212(i); 8 U.S.C. § 1182(i). VAWA would allow her to keep her legal permanent residence without having to continue to remain married to and reside with Mr. V, whom apparently she no longer cared about. Ms. Trupiano successfully argued and demonstrated that the wife had submitted a false police report and then sought a protective order that was dismissed as being without merit.

Trupiano Law Successfully Argues against Involuntary Administration of Medication of Defendant Who Was Incompetent to Proceed

D. P. – Case No. 041404522, Fourth District, Utah County
Synopsis: Ms. Trupiano successfully argued that the Utah State Hospital should stop administering medication to a patient involuntarily in order to make her competent to proceed in her criminal matter without having first had a hearing before the criminal court judge where the Hospital must demonstrate the four factors set forth by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Sell, 539 U.S. 166 at 180-183, 123 S.Ct. 2174 at 2183, 156 L.Ed.2d 197 at 210 (2003).

Ms. P was charged with:

  • One count of illegal possession or use of a controlled substance, a second Degree Felony, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(2)(A)(i),
  • One count of illegal possession a drug paraphernalia, class A misdemeanor, in violation of Utah Code Ann. § 58-37A-5.

Ms. P had been found incompetent to proceed and was sent to the Utah State Hospital. While there, she was being administered psychotropic medication to render her competent to proceed; however, after several weeks the medication began to make her feel extremely uncomfortable and jittery [1]. Ms. P told the staff at the Utah State Hospital that she no longer desired to consent to that medication. It came to the attention of Ms. Trupiano and the Utah County Public Defenders’ Office that the Utah State Hospital had made an internal agency decision to continue to administer the psychotropic medication even though Ms. P had discontinued her authorization. The Public Defenders’ Office filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause to stop the wrongful involuntary administration of the medication to Ms. P. The State indicated the doctors at the Hospital should be given deference by the court – which was rejected by the court. Ms. Trupiano was asked to get involved by visiting with Ms. P and drafting a reply brief.

Judge Claudia Laycock agreed with Ms. Trupiano’s arguments that the court must be the decision-making body to authorize involuntary administration of medication to a defendant where the primary reason for said medication is to render the defendant competent to proceed. Ms. Trupiano successfully argued that the court had jurisdiction to review the claim for relief where Court may compel obedience to its own order in this criminal case and the Court must ensure that the Hospital provides Ms. P with the requisite procedural and substantive due process in its execution of the court’s Order to render Ms. P competent to proceed. See United States v. Sell, 539 U.S. 166 at 178, 123 S.Ct. 2174 at 2183, 156 L.Ed.2d 197 at 210 (2003). Coercive administration of antipsychotic drugs may compromise a defendant’s Eighth and Sixth Amendment rights to a fair trial and undermine his ability to participate effectively in his own defense by dulling his cognition, and thus compromising his “interaction with counsel, or his comprehension at trial.” Riggins v. Nevada, 504 US. 127, at 136-138. Thus, Judge Laycock set the matter for an evidentiary hearing where the Utah State Hospital needed to demonstrate its action were appropriate by applying the four factors under Sell. That is, the Utah State Hospital needed to prove at the evidentiary hearing why it was necessary to administer the medication to Ms. P to make her competent to proceed and to ensure said medication would not interfere with her Eighth and Sixth Amendment rights to a fair trial and ability to participate effectively in her own defense.


[1]The most dramatic of the more common side effects produced by antipsychotic medication are known as extrapyramidal disorders.” Bee v. Greaves, 744 F.2d 1387, 1396 n.7 (10th Cir. 1984) (Utah law) (Bee I) (citing Freedman and Kaplan). “These are categorized as pseudo-parkinsonisms (mask-like face, tremors, muscle stiffness and rigidity, and shuffling gait), dyskinesia (muscle spasms, especially in the eyes, neck, face and arms, writhing and grimacing movements, protrusions of the tongue) and akathesia (inability to stay still, restlessness and agitation). Other non-muscular side effects include drowsiness, weakness, weight gain, dizziness, fainting, dry mouth and blurred vision. . . .” Id. The “most serious threat that [many antipsychotics] pose[ ] to a patient’s health is a condition known as tardive dyskinesia . . . [which] appears in some patients who have undergone long term treatment with anti-psychotic medication or may occur after drug therapy has been discontinued. The syndrome is characterized by rhythmical involuntary movements of the tongue, face, mouth, or jaw. These movements are sometimes accompanied by involuntary movements of one’s extremities. There is no known effective treatment for tardive dyskinesia.” Id. (citation omitted). The condition is not only severe, but widespread. According to a recent study, 50-56% of hospitalized schizophrenics and 41% of outpatients are afflicted with the condition. Id.

[1]Although these cases involving dismissals of petitions for protective orders are not “criminal” per se, it is worthy of mention here.