Jason Kadish – Case Results in 2017

Below are successful outcomes Jason Kadish has obtained for his clients in Philadelphia criminal cases. While each and every case is unique, our goal is to always achieve the best possible result for the client. Please contact The Law Office of Jason C. Kadish today to begin discussing your situation with Mr. Kadish.

Aggravated Assault, Rape & Sexual Assault – Acquitted of All Charges

Commonwealth v. C.G.: Client was accused of rape, aggravated assault, sexual assault, and related charges by his ex-girlfriend. Cross-examination of the ex-girlfriend (and her sister) revealed that she had overstayed her student visa and was concerned that Client may report her illegal status to federal authorities. Client acquitted of all charges at the conclusion of a jury trial.

Robbery, Rape & Sexual Assault – Acquitted of All Charges

Commonwealth v. P.G.: Client was accused of rape, robbery, sexual assault, and related charges. The accuser’s story was not corroborated by the physical evidence – investigation revealed that Client’s DNA was excluded from the DNA sample collected from the accuser following the incident. Client acquitted of all charges at the conclusion of a judge trial.

Aggravated Assault & Firearm Possession – Acquitted of All Charges

Commonwealth v. T.P.: Client had been accused of two counts of Aggravated Assault and illegal possession of a firearm. Cross-examination of three police eyewitnesses to the shooting revealed multiple inconsistencies in the officer’s respective accounts of the incident. Client acquitted of all charges following the conclusion of a jury trial.

Firearm Possession – All Charges Dismissed Following a Preliminary Hearing

Commonwealth v. G.M.: Client charged with illegal possession a firearm in car. Police had pulled over a car driven by Client for a traffic violation. A firearm was subsequently recovered from the passenger compartment of the car. Case dismissed for lack of evidence, all charges, following the conclusion of a preliminary hearing.

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) – All Charges Withdrawn After Motion to Suppress Evidence Granted

Commonwealth v. D.S.: Client charged with Driving Under the Influence and related charges. Client had been pulled over by police officers for allegedly committing a moving vehicle violation (driving without a driver’s side mirror), after which police smelled a strong odor of marijuana and concluded that Client was unfit to operate a motor vehicle.

A motion to suppress evidence was filed and litigated on behalf of the client. The court ruled that the officer’s account of the original traffic stop was incredible; and, as a result, any evidence and observations resulting from the illegal stop were not admissible at trial. As a result, the Commonwealth withdrew all charges.

Firearm Possession – All Charges Dismissed Following a Preliminary Hearing

Commonwealth v. A.B.: Client was charged with illegal possession of a firearm found inside a car. At the conclusion of the hearing, Mr. Kadish successfully argued that the Commonwealth could not demonstrate constructive possession of the firearm—that Client knew of the presence of the firearm and intended to exercise control over it. Accordingly, all charges were dismissed.

Firearm Possession – Acquitted of All Charges

Commonwealth v. A.P.: Client was charged with illegal possession of a firearm. Police alleged that they observed Client discard a firearm on a street. While police recovered a firearm, Mr. Kadish introduced evidence that multiple people were present in the area where the gun was recovered at the time of the police investigation. Furthermore, cross-examination of the police officers demonstrated inconsistencies between their trial testimony and real-time recordings of their transmissions made over police band radio. The jury acquitted the client of all charges at the conclusion of a jury trial.

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) & Possession of a Controlled Substance – Acquitted of All Charges

Commonwealth v. K.C.: Client was charged with driving under the influence and possession of a controlled substance. Police responded to the scene of an accident and found Client in the driver’s seat of a parked vehicle. Police arrested Client after concluding she was intoxicated; subsequently, they recovered two crack pipes and a bag of crack-cocaine from the interior of the car.

Cross-examination of the responding police officer revealed that the car in which Client was found was not running. Additionally, another male at the scene was in possession of the keys to the car. Finally, the officer could not testify as to how long the client had been inside the vehicle or as to whether she owned the car. As a result, a motion for a judgment of acquittal (equivalent to a not guilty) was granted as to the charge of driving under the influence.

Client was subsequently found not guilty of the possession of a controlled substance charge, as the court concluded that the Commonwealth did not prove Client possessed the crack-cocaine found inside the vehicle.

Drug Dealing & Conspiracy Charges – Acquitted of All Charges

Commonwealth v. T.P.: Client was charged with dealing drugs to multiple clients on a city street. Client was also charged with conspiracy for allegedly taking part in these drug deals with another person. The Commonwealth’s case was based upon observations of a single undercover police officer. Upon cross examination, the police officer admitted that he could not see exactly what was passed between Client and the person with whom he interacted with. Further, the police officer admitted that he could not see whether the Client accessed the stash of drugs later found in a nearby alley. Client acquitted of all charges following a judge trial.

Drug Dealing Charges – Acquitted of All Charges

Commonwealth v. G.M.: Police stopped Client for a motor vehicle violation. After removing Client from the car, police recovered over three hundred containers of crack cocaine from the vehicle. Cross-examination of the police officers involved in the investigation showed discrepancies as to where inside the vehicle the drugs were recovered. As a result, the court held that the Commonwealth failed to prove that Client possessed the large quantity of drugs, and Client was found not guilty following a judge trial.

Assault of a Law Enforcement Officer, Aggravated Assault, Robbery, Firearm Possession, and Related Charges – All Charges Withdrawn

Commonwealth v. K.D.: Client was arrested and charged with aggravated assault and robbery against a civilian, and assault of a law enforcement officer (a charge that relates to shooting at a police officer). The charge of assault of a law enforcement officer carries a mandatory penalty of twenty years incarceration. Mr. Kadish presented the Commonwealth with evidence of Client’s alibi, and the Commonwealth agreed to further investigate. The Commonwealth subsequently withdrew all charges.