Free Consultation Fill out the form below and we'll be in touch within 24 hours!

All fields are required.

Criminal Defense Case Results

Disclaimer: The Texas Bar does not approve or review the case results that criminal defense attorneys list on their website. If you would like to learn more about our recent case results and statements regarding the quality our work, please read and understand each of the following:

  • The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the facts and circumstances of the cases discussed here.
  • Not all results are provided.
  • The case results discussed here are not necessarily representative of the results obtained in all cases.
  • Each case is different and must be evaluated and handled on its own merit.

Past results are not necessarily an indication of a future result for any prospective client because the individual facts and circumstances may differ from those criminal cases mentioned herein.


Horak Law | Criminal Case Results


Back to top

Driving While Intoxicated (DWI)

  • Charge: DWI blood test / marijuana drug test
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. R.M.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: The prosecution claimed that the combination of alcohol and marijuana created legal intoxication, but we showed the evidence, science, and my client’s outstanding performance on video did not support the state’s theory.
  • Charge: DWI / refusal
  • Result: State reduced case to reckless driving
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. R.R.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Hung jury after trial.
  • Charge: DWI / refusal
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. M.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client looked like he passed the field tests but he officer still arrested him. There are many bad arrests from “erring on the side of caution.”
  • Charge: DWI / breath test refusal
  • Result: Not guilty after trial
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. B.A.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: We showed the jury the incorrect procedures the officer performed and that the field sobriety tests, in general, are completely slanted and not “scientific tests” in any regard. The prosecution tried to convict based on my client’s refusal to provide a sample – after he had already been placed under arrest for DWI.
  • Charge: DWI breath test .17
  • Result: Dismissed week before trial
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. C.H.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: After repeatedly trying to convince the prosecutor that the breath test evidence had many problems, I set the case for trial. Also, the client looked outstanding on video. We had three trial settings, and the state finally dismissed the case when their own expert told them that the evidence was bad.
  • Charge: DWI refusal
  • Result: Reduced to reckless driving
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. D.N.
  • County: Fort Bend
  • Details: Case reduced to Reckless Driving after we showed that there may be issues with the traffic stop.
  • Charge: DWI with accident / blood test .24
  • Result: Dismissed day of trial
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. R.C.
  • County: Galveston
  • Details: We investigated the person that "witnessed" the accident. We tracked him to a prison and discovered that he had a bad memory from the night of the accident and in fact had no idea what happened.
  • Charge: DWI breath test refusal
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. K.H.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: An “off-duty” officer called in to another officer that my client was driving all over the road. A third officer was also called in to do field sobriety tests. Between the three officers, there were so many mistakes made during the DWI investigation, the prosecution finally realized they could not prove their case.
  • Charge: DWI / possession of weapon
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: April 2011
  • Case: State v. D.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: When officer stated that client would be “let go” if he passed the breath test, he made an illegal statement and the breath test could not be let in for trial. Because the DWI was dismissed, the weapon case had to be tossed out as well.
  • Charge: DWI
  • Result: Trial dismissed by prosecution 2 hours into trial
  • Date: March 2010
  • Case: State v. J.M.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We showed that the arresting officer, with 25 years experience on patrol, did not know how to properly conduct field sobriety tests.
  • Charge: DWI / breath test allegation
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: March 2010
  • Case: State v. H.M.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We proved to the state that the breath test calculation was incorrect and that my client should not have been arrested.
  • Charge: DWI – blood test refusal
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2009
  • Case: State v. R.A.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Shown that client attempted to take the blood test, but officers unwilling to allow him to use vials from the hospital. Client looked good on video despite officer stating that he failed field sobriety tests.
  • Charge: DWI no breath sample
  • Result: Not guilty by jury
  • Date: May 2009
  • Case: State v. R.E.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Officer did not perform field sobriety tests properly.
  • Charge: Felony DWI with child passenger
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: February 2009
  • Case: State v. C.D.
  • County: Washington
  • Details: Client’s blood results taken. Client scored well on DWI field sobriety tests.
  • Charge: DWI breath test refusal
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2009
  • Case: State v. B.O.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client scored well on field sobriety tests and looked good on videotape.
  • Charge: DWI breath test refusal
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2009
  • Case: State v. R.W.
  • County: Galveston
  • Details: Evidentiary issues for the State.
  • Charge: DWI with drug intoxication
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: October 2008
  • Case: State v. J.B.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Client in high school about to start college. Evidence issues with the case.
  • Charge: DWI with drug intoxication
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: October 2008
  • Case: State v. C.M.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Client passed up officer at high rate of speed and admitted to drinking and taking prescription medication. Charge refiled as another misdemeanor.
  • Charge: DWI – breath test failure
  • Result: Dismissed day of trial
  • Date: September 2008
  • Case: State v. M.H.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client blew over twice the legal limit. Shown that improper police procedures led to stop and arrest of client.
  • Charge: DWI – breath test refusal
  • Result: Dismissed day of trial
  • Date: July 2008
  • Case: State v. M.A.
  • County: Fort Bend
  • Details: Third hour of video revealed officer stating that he did not have probable cause to stop the vehicle.
  • Charge: DWI – breath test failure
  • Result: Dismissed day of trial
  • Date: July 2008
  • Case: State v. B.W.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Shown to the State that it could not be proven that client was above .08 at the time of driving.
  • Charge: DWI – breath test refusal
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2008
  • Case: State v. J.N.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: According to video client was not intoxicated.
  • Charge: DWI
  • Result: DWI Dismissed
  • Date: May 2008
  • Case: State v. C.A.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Client’s charge refiled as reckless driving / sentenced to deferred adjudication probation.
  • Charge: DWI breath test failure
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: April 2008
  • Case: State v. B.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence shown to the state that client was not over legal limit at time of driving – same client had assault family violence case dismissed –both cases pending at the same time.
  • Charge: DWI – drug intoxication
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: February 2008
  • Case: State v. C.W.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Shown that client’s medical condition required certain prescription drugs that could cause someone to show signs of slurred speech and convulsions, but client not actually intoxicated.
  • Charge: DWI
  • Result: Dismissed day of trial
  • Date: February 2008
  • Case: State v. K.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client’s mother called to the scene to pick up client. Officer lied in his report. We showed the phone records indicating that officer actually called. Client was not intoxicated.
  • Charge: DWI 2nd
  • Result: Probation revocation dismissed
  • Date: February 2008
  • Case: State v. R.A.
  • County: Harris
  • Charge: DWI intoxication from drugs
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: November 2006
  • Case: State v. L.D.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence presented that client was not intoxicated, but suffering from medical issues.

Back to top

Marijuana and Drug-Related Charges

  • Charge: Marijuana class B
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. J.S.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Officer asked permission to search. Client gave consent to only retrieve the passenger’s open container from the car, but the officer went ahead and unlawfully searched the whole car.
  • Charge: 1st-degree felony possesses w/intent to deliver controlled substance
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. J.A.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Client’s friend dropped several grams of meth and heroin into client’s purse and the officer did not establish proper consent or probable cause to search my client’s purse.
  • Charge: Marijuana
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. C.R.
  • County: Liberty
  • Details: After two hearings the judge finally made the correct ruling that the officer did not have probable cause to initiate a traffic stop and therefore the drugs were suppressed and the case dismissed.
  • Charge: Marijuana class B
  • Result: Dismissed day of trial
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. S.A.
  • County: Brazoria
  • Details: Cop thought that my client “eyeballing him” while he drove by was reason enough to conduct a traffic stop. He was wrong.
  • Charge: Possession of a controlled substance
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. D.P.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Defendant was in the wrong place at the wrong time. After we did our investigation, we realized that the officer was wrong in his report and the security guard who detained my client and his friend had not in fact seen my client in possession of drugs
  • Charge: Marijuana Class B
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. V.O.
  • County: Fort Bend
  • Details: Officer had my client under arrest before he searched the car. While he was searching the car, he when back to my client and asked him where the marijuana was without reading him his rights first. Did not know this until we saw the video.
  • Charge: Possession of marijuana
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2010
  • Case: State v. J.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our investigation proved that the cop did not, in fact, have the right to search our client after entering into the residence where other drugs were found belonging to another person.
  • Charge: Possession of a controlled substance - 3rd-degree felony
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2010
  • Case: State v. L.P.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Prosecution started with an offer of 8 years on TDC. We provided evidence that the drugs found did not belong to our client.
  • Charge: Felony prescription fraud
  • Result: Grand Jury No-Bill (case dismissed)
  • Date: April 2010
  • Case: State v. M.G.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We presented evidence to show that client was in fact prescribed the medication in the past.
  • Charge: Felony possession of a controlled Substance
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2010
  • Case: State v. L.P.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We presented evidence showing the drugs were actually in someone else's possession.
  • Charge: Misdemeanor possession of marijuana
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: October 2009
  • Case: State v. R.E.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Our investigation proved that the stop by police was unlawful, according to the Offense Report. Due to the stop, all of the state's evidence was improperly used.
  • Charge: Possession of marijuana
  • Result: Charge reduced
  • Date: October 2009
  • Case: State v. J.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Reduced charge to Class C (speeding ticket level charge) misdemeanor possession drug paraphernalia
  • Charge: Possession controlled substance + marijuana
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: August 2009
  • Case: State v. A.D.
  • County: Brazoria
  • Details: Client had three pending charges. Client's DWI reduced to reckless driving and two drug charges were dismissed on the day of trial.
  • Charge: Possession of marijuana
  • Result: Pre-trial Diversion
  • Date: August 2009
  • Case: State v. J.D.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Client had stellar academic record and references. Case will be dismissed after completion of terms of pre-trial diversion.
  • Charge: Obtaining drugs by fraud - 3rd-degree felony
  • Result: No Bill
  • Date: July 2009
  • Case: State v. F.A.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our client was a recent medical school graduate. We presented evidence to the Grand Jury resulting in the Grand Jury dismissing the case against our client.
  • Charge: Possession of Marijuana
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2009
  • Case: State v. W.C.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Two girls were charged with possessing same marijuana in a vehicle. Shown that the other person charged was the guilty party.
  • Charge: Possession of a controlled substance
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2009
  • Case: State v. A.S.
  • Details: Shown that the police did not have probable cause to search the car and that our client was never in possession of narcotics.
  • Charge: Felony 3rd degree - possession controlled substance
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2009
  • Case: State v. M.K.
  • County: Waller
  • Charge: Possession of Marijuana
  • Result: Charge reduced
  • Date: January 2009
  • Case: State v. C.A.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Reduced charge to Class C (speeding ticket level charge) misdemeanor possession drug paraphernalia
  • Charge: Misdemeanor Possession Marijuana
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: November 2008
  • Case: State v. C.M.
  • County: Galveston
  • Details: Client agreed to take drug awareness education class
  • Charge: Sale Alcohol to Minor
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: August 2008
  • Case: State v. N.M.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Charge: Delivery Controlled Substance 1st Degree Felony + Possession Controlled Substance 2nd Degree Felony
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2008
  • Case: State v. S.H.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Cocaine found in client’s car while she was driving. Evidence showed that she had no knowledge of the cocaine. Client pleaded guilty to misdemeanor possession of marijuana.
  • Charge: Possession Marijuana Class B Misdemeanor
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: April 2008
  • Case: State v. R.O.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Evidence shown that police did not have probable cause to approach and stop my client.
  • Charge: Possession of Controlled Substance - 2nd Degree Felony
  • Result: Jury Acquittal - Not Guilty Verdict
  • Date: November 2007
  • Case: State v. C. B.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Officer arrested my client in his truck with a pipe that was “hot to the touch”. Officer struggled to retell his story during trial.
  • Charge: Possession of Controlled Substance - Misdemeanor
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: November 2007
  • Case: State v. C.W.
  • County: Harris
  • Charge: Misdemeanor Possession Marijuana
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2006
  • Case: State v. T.L.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence shown that the driver of the vehicle was in possession of marijuana, not our client.

Back to top

Sexual Offenses

  • Charge: Failure to register as a sex offender
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. K.L.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We showed the prosecution that there was an oversight and that the client had been working off shore when they visited his house despite the fact that his mother stated that he rarely came to the house.
  • Charge: Improper relationship between teacher and student
  • Result: No-bill by Grand Jury
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. K.B.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Charge: Prostitution (Misdemeanor)
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: July 2010
  • Case: State v. M.F.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We proved that the police “busted the wrong guy” and that our client had a language barrier with an undercover cop and that our client had no intention of inappropriate behavior with the undercover cop.
  • Charge: Sexual Assault
  • Result: Grand Jury No Bill (case dismissed)
  • Date: July 2010
  • Case: State v. E.R.
  • Details: Evidence presented to the Grand Jury showed that our client was not guilty and had not done anything inappropriate to the person that was accusing him of sexual assault.
  • Charge: Indecent Exposure
  • Result: Dismissed day before trial
  • Date: June 2010
  • Case: State v. J.P
  • County: Harris
  • Details: The police were overzealous in their attempts to set up an undercover sting and arrested my client for something he did not do.
  • Charge: 2 Felony counts of Sexual Assault of a Child
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: September 2009
  • Case: Stave v. R.A.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Two counts were dismissed the day of trial. Our investigation showed serious flaws in the state's case. District Attorney attempted to reduce charge, but we refused due to inadequate evidence.
  • Charge: Felony Sexual Assault of a Child
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: September 2009
  • Case: State v. P.W
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Case dismissed the week before trial. Our investigation showed there were serious flaws with the State's evidence against our client.
  • Charge: Prohibited Sexual Conduct
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2009
  • Case: State v. S.V.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our investigation showed that our client was actually the victim.
  • Charge: Harassment
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2009
  • Case: State v. A.J.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence shown that state could not prove my client had any contact with alleged victim.
  • Charge: 3rd Degree Felony Indecent Exposure
  • Result: Charge Reduced to Class B Misdemeanor - no sex offender registration requirement
  • Date: December 2008
  • Case: State v. M.K.
  • County: Harris
  • Charge: Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child (Charge carries 25-year minimum sentence & registration for life as a sex offender)
  • Result: Charge Reduced
  • Date: August 2008
  • Case: State v. N.W.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Charge reduced to second-degree felony / deferred probation / no sex offender registration
  • Charge: Harassment
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: March 2008
  • Case: State v. R.R.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Charge: Sexual Assault
  • Result: No Bill – Grand Jury refused to indict
  • Date: September 2007
  • Case: State v. L.L.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence shown to Grand Jury that alleged victim was not telling the truth.
  • Charge: Failure to Register as a Sex Offender
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: March 2007
  • Case: State v. D.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence presented that client had in fact registered as a sex offender where he was living.

Back to top

White Collar Crime / Fraud / Cyber Crimes

  • Charge: White Collar Fraud
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. C.V.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: After reviewing boxes of paperwork and hundreds of emails, I did not see a case that could be made against my client – even after she had already been arrested and charged with defrauding her employer for thousands of dollars. Finally convinced the government that the “victims” were actually out to get my client and there was no illegal activity.
  • Charge: Forgery
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. R.K.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: After alleging that my client tried to embezzle almost a million dollars, the evidence showed it was all a sham perpetrated by the “victim”. After a year of dealing with a prosecutor too lazy to review his own case file we were able to prove that the case was awful, a new prosecutor took the case and realized there was no case.
  • Charge: Felony Engaging in Organized Crime
  • Result: Reduced to misdemeanor
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. I.R.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Reduced to a misdemeanor shoplifting case when we showed that client had not in fact worked with her daughter as an accomplice.
  • Charge: Felony welfare fraud
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2010
  • Case: State v. T.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: The prosecution was unable to prove that our client had in fact received any funds in a fraudulent manner from the state government.
  • Charge: Forgery
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2010
  • Case: State v. T.K.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Showed the State that our client was actually the victim of an internet scam
  • Charge: Fraudulent Use of Identifying Information
  • Result: No Bill Grand Jury (refusal to Indict)
  • Date: June 2008
  • Case: State v. P.M.
  • County: Brazoria
  • Details: Evidence shown to the Grand Jury that this case was not actually a felony charge; maybe a misdemeanor. No charges filed.
  • Charge: Fraudulent Use of Identifying Information
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: April 2008
  • Case: State v. T.B.
  • County: Nacogdoches
  • Details: Client charged with felony using another person’s credit card account to purchase jewelry. We were able to show that my client’s deadbeat boyfriend was the actual suspect.
  • Charge: Forgery (internet scam)
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2008
  • Case: State v. M.S.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Evidence shown that client actually believed that he was working for a legitimate business.
  • Charge: Internet Scam
  • Result: Felony Reduced to Misdemeanor
  • Date: November 2007
  • Case: State v. D.F.
  • County: Harris
  • Charge: Forgery - 2 counts – internet scam
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: September 2006
  • Case: State v. C.H.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We showed that there was insufficient evidence to convict our client.

Violent Crimes and Domestic Violence Charges

  • Charge: Aggravated Assault with Deadly Weapon
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. K.B.
  • Details: “Victim” called 911 and stated that my client had pulled a gun and aimed it at his face. After our investigation, we showed the prosecutor that there was no gun and no witness in the middle of the day in stop and go traffic.
  • Charge: Assault on Family Member
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: We showed the prosecution that the evidence showed that the wife was at fault and had assaulted my client. Prosecution agreed to allow family violence counseling for my client and the case was dismissed.
  • Charge: Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our client was an army vet that in fact had entered a fight between a man and his wife. The victim had lied and stated that my client was the aggressor. Our witnesses stated otherwise and the case was finally dismissed after months of trying to get the prosecutors to speak with our witnesses.
  • Charge: Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Young client pulled a knife to threaten his mom and her boyfriend. After we showed the state that an assault had not, in fact, occurred because the witness did not feel our client could or would use the knife against him.
  • Charge: Assault on Police Officer
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: July 2010
  • Case: State v. K.B.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our investigation confirmed with the police officer that our client had not in fact intentionally assaulted him, but was struggling on the ground with the cop putting a knee in her back.
  • Charge: Deadly conduct
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2010
  • Case: State v. T.B.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We showed that our client had in fact called the police and was running from another couple that was committing road rage against her. We produced the 911 recording that our client had made to the emergency center.
  • Charge: Assault Family Violence
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: April 2010
  • Case: State v. D.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our client’s wife had assaulted him and then called the police. We showed the prosecution that our client’s wife was the actual aggressor in this situation and that the police should not have arrested our client without hearing his side of the story.
  • Charge: Assault Family Violence
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: October 2009
  • Case: State v. A.G.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: State did not have the evidence to prove that the assault occurred.
  • Charge: Assault by Contact
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: October 2009
  • Case: State v. F.G.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our evidence proved that there was mutual combat, the state was forced to dismiss.
  • Charge: Misdemeanor Assault and Misdemeanor Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: September 2009
  • Case: State v. C.L.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: After being set for trial, DA was forced to dismiss the case based on evidence of the co-defendant assaulting our client.
  • Charge: Aggravated Assault on Police Officer - 1st Degree Felony
  • Result: No Bill
  • Date: August 2009
  • Case: State v. C.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our investigation and evidence showed that an assault had not taken place.
  • Charge: Assault – Bodily injury + Unlawful Restraint
  • Result: Both Charges Dismissed
  • Date: February 2009
  • Case: State v. O.H.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Shown that alleged victim falsified information to the police.
  • Charge: Aggravated Assault Family Member
  • Result: State v. J.L.
  • Date: No Bill Grand Jury (refusal to Indict)
  • Case: State v. J.L.
  • Details: Evidence presented to Grand Jury showing client’s innocence and that the complaining witness lied to the police
  • Charge: Assault Family Violence
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: September 2008
  • Case: State v. L.P.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Evidence shown that alleged victim was not telling the truth.
  • Charge: Assault – Family Violence
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: July 2008
  • Case: State v. B.D.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our investigation showed that client was actually the victim of assault.
  • Charge: Assault Misdemeanor
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2008
  • Case: State v. H. J.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Shown that client acted in self-defense.
  • Charge: Aggravated Assault
  • Result: Judge Verdict Not Guilty
  • Date: March 2008
  • Case: State v. K.H.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Case was tried in front of a jury, but the judge ordered a verdict of not- guilty after we cross-examined the State’s witnesses in the case.
  • Charge: Assault – Family Violence
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: February 2008
  • Case: State v. B.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence shown that state could not prove it’s case
  • Charge: Assault Family Member
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2008
  • Case: State v. D.P.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Shown that the alleged victim made false allegations against client.
  • Charge: Assault on Peace Officer - 3rd Degree felony
  • Result: Felony Charge Reduced to Misdemeanor - Fine only
  • Date: December 2007
  • Case: State v. C.G.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence that police also had some fault in the confrontation

Back to top

Weapon and Gun-Related Offenses

  • Charge: Aggravated Assault-Deadly Weapon
  • Result: Grand Jury No-Bill (case dismissed)
  • Date: May 2010
  • Case: State. v. L.N.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: We presented evidence that our client had not, in fact, threatened his family member with a weapon and that the situation had been blown out of proportion and that there was merely a family disturbance.
  • Charge: Felony - felon in possession of a weapon
  • Result: Dismissed day of trial
  • Date: March 2010
  • Case: State v. J.G.
  • Details: Officer violated my client's Constitutional rights numerous times in order to find something with which to charge my client.
  • Charge: Carrying a Weapon
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: February 2010
  • Case: /State v. J.A.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Showed that client mistakenly arrested at airport while going through security with a loaded pistol
  • Charge: Aggravated Robbery-Deadly Weapon - 1st-degree felony (5 Year minimum)
  • Result: Trial
  • Date: January 2010
  • Case: State v. C.B.
  • County: Bexar
  • Details: reduced to a Class A misdemeanor for "time served" on the day of trial/ we showed that client had no intention of taking anything from the alleged victim and merely got into a fist fight to protect his friend
  • Charge: Unlawful Carrying Weapon
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2006
  • Case: State v. W.Y.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence shown that client was in lawful possession of the pistol he was carrying.

Back to top

Theft and Burglary Offenses

  • Charge: Shoplifting
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2013
  • Case: State v. K.M.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: When we finally secured copies of the photo-spread, video, and the police phone recording with my client, it was clear that the state could not identify my client.
  • Charge: Felony Theft
  • Result: Not Guilty
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. C.B.
  • County: Fort Bend
  • Details: Two charges of felony theft trial to a jury. The judge ruled in our favor and granted a “Not Guilty” verdict on one charge and granted a mistrial on the second charge when the jury could not reach a unanimous decision.
  • Charge: Felony Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. J.H.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client volunteered to fight fires in Magnolia and purchased fire gear from a firefighter. After client was done volunteering, he sold the gear and was later arrested for selling stolen property. Ridiculous.
  • Charge: Felony Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • County: Harris
  • Details: After neighbors were evicted, my client (a Korean War vet) pulled the rod iron gate that was falling down into his own backyard with the help of another neighbor. Only after we showed the prosecution the letter that my client had left the neighbor stating that the gate was in my client’s back yard and to come pick it up, did the case get dismissed. Again – ridiculous! (this is one that I bring up when people ask me how I defend criminals)
  • Charge: Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2011
  • Case: State v. M.M.
  • County: Galveston
  • Details: We showed that my client had not stolen any property and that this was a situation that was essentially a business transaction gone bad and that my client had no intention of stealing any property that he was using.
  • Charge: Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: November 2009
  • Case: State v. G.P.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: State did not have evidence to go forward with trial.
  • Charge: Felony Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: September 2009
  • Case: State v. D.K.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client charged with theft of livestock. Our evidence showed that client had not stolen anything, but was simply taking care of a wandering animal.
  • Charge: State Jail Aggregate Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2009
  • Case: State v. N.S.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Defendant on probation in Harris County and allowed to successfully complete probation in Harris County after paying restitution to the alleged victim.
  • Charge: Felony Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2009
  • Case: State v. A.L.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Our investigation showed that the situation was actually business dealings gone bad. Client allowed to correct the situation.
  • Charge: Burglary
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: April 2009
  • Case: State v. L.R.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence presented to prosecutors that client had permission to enter his friend’s house.
  • Charge: Felony Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: December 2008
  • Case: State v. J.P.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Alleged victim agreed to state dismissing the charges.
  • Charge: Second Degree Burglary
  • Result: Charge Reduced to Misdemeanor theft
  • Date: August 2008
  • Case: State v. D.N.
  • County: San Jacinto
  • Details: Defense investigation shown to prosecution that client’s boyfriend was the true suspect
  • Charge: Felony Theft
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2008
  • Case: State v. A.B.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Client repaid missing money
  • Charge: Shoplifting
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: May 2008
  • Case: State v. H.F.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence presented that client’s friend actually stole the merchandise.
  • Charge: Burglary
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: February 2008
  • Case: State v. P.F.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Evidence showed that client was given the property that the witness stated that the client took without permission.

Back to top

Probation Violations

  • Charge: Motion to revoke
  • Result: Dismissed 2nd Motion to revoke
  • Date: July 2012
  • Case: State v. E.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Convinced judge that client she could get her probation straight and complete her requirements.
  • Charge: Motion to revoke
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: November 2011
  • Case: State v. E.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Showed the judge and the state that client was able to get caught up on her probation. She was reinstated and will not be sentenced to prison time.
  • Charge: New Law Violation (Felony)
  • Result: Probation Reinstated
  • Date: April 2010
  • Case: State v. C.H.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our client was accused of felony assault family violence by choking and was on felony probation for a drug offense. We are able to keep our client from going to prison. He was reinstated on his felony probation and his felony assault case was reduced to a misdemeanor. He will now not have to worry about having a felony conviction on his record for the rest of his life.
  • Result: Motion to Adjudicate
  • Date: December 2009
  • Case: State v. K.M.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details:Client on deferred probation and is charged with a new felony offense. We convinced the state and the judge to keep my client out of jail and simply change his deferred probation to regular probation and serve the remainder of his term.
  • Result: Probation Reinstated
  • Date: October 2009
  • Case: State v. D.C.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: While on probation, client charged with felony in another county and convicted of a misdemeanor. We successfully prevented his probation from being revoked.
  • Result: Felony Probation reinstated
  • Date: March 2009
  • Case: State v. D.E.
  • County: Liberty
  • Details: Client allowed to continue on probation despite not showing up for court and failing a lie detector test.
  • Result: Felony Probation reinstated
  • Date: March 2009
  • Case: State v. D.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client agreed to enroll in drug rehabilitation instead of going to prison.
  • Charge: Felony Motion to Revoke Probation
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: August 2008
  • Case: State v. C.F.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client’s probation approved to be transferred to Dallas. Judge agreed to reinstate probation.
  • Result: 2nd Degree Felony Probation Reinstated
  • Date: January 2008
  • Case: State v. K.S.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Client ordered to attend outpatient drug treatment instead of prison.
  • Result: Misdemeanor Probation Reinstated
  • Date: January 2008
  • Case: State v. R.T.
  • County: Montgomery
  • Details: Judge agreed to give client another chance to finish probation successfully

Back to top

Federal Offenses

  • Charge: Federal Conspiracy to Commit Theft
  • Result: Client sentenced to probation. No jail time.
  • Date: March 2009
  • Case: United States v. E.M.
  • District: Southern District of Texas

Back to top

Other Felony Charges

  • Charge: Felony Evading Arrest
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: September 2008
  • Case: State v. D.P.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Shown to the state that client did not know that officer was behind her.
  • Charge: Felony Hindering Apprehension
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2006
  • Case: State v. T.C.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: State could not prove that client acted to violate the law

Back to top

Other Offenses

  • Charge: Failure to identify officer
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: 2012
  • Case: State v. J.P.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Our evidence gave us facts showing that the officer was mistaken and being overly aggressive with our young client.
  • Charge: Resisting arrest and Failure to stop and give info.
  • Result: Both charges Dismissed
  • Date: June 2010
  • Case: State v. J.R.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: My client was innocent of both charges. A young HPD cop forcibly arrested my client for failure to stop and give information although there was no evidence of a wreck and then the officer beat up my 67-year-old client.
  • Charge: Criminal Mischief
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: June 2010
  • Case: State v. E.A.
  • County:: Harris
  • Details: Our client had not in fact intentionally caused any damage to another person’s door. This other person had actually slammed the door on our client’s foot, causing the damage to the door.
  • Charge: Interfering with Duties of a Police Officer
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: February 2010
  • Case: State v. H.A.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Proved that our client was actually the victim of an assault and the officer arrested our client out of frustration rather than properly conducting an investigation.
  • Charge: Failure to Stop and Give Info
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: October 2009
  • Case: State v. K.A.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: The facts showed that our client was simply trying to find a safe area to exchange information after a minor accident.
  • Charge: Failure to Stop and Give Information
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: October 2009
  • Case: State v. C.M.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: We presented evidence that our client was not guilty because the client had in fact attempted to provide information, but the other party left the scene of the accident and did not return.
  • Charge: False Report to Police Officer
  • Result: Dismissed
  • Date: January 2008
  • Case: State v. J.N.
  • County: Harris
  • Details: Evidence shown that client contacted police officer for lawful reason

Back to top

Our Office in The Woodlands
1790 Hughes Landing Blvd #400 The Woodlands, TX 77380 (281) 907-4990
Our Office in Houston
5300 Memorial Dr #750 A Houston, TX 77007 (713) 225-8000
Free Consultation Fill out the form below and we'll be in touch within 24 hours!

All fields are required.

Matt Horak Matt Horak is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization since 2014