Our Case Results
A Real Law Firm Getting Real Results

Third District Court - Salt Lake City (2009)
A popular high school teacher was accused of sexually abusing a high school student on several occasions. The teacher faced numerous first degree felony counts of forcible sodomy and several second degree felony counts of forcible sexual abuse. Holding firm that he was innocent of the allegations, and after a long litigation process and extensive investigation, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat secured a not guilty verdict on all charges.

Third District Court - Salt Lake City, Case No. 071901921
The defendant was a homeowner who was charged with Assault on a Police Officer, Interference with an Arrest, and Disorderly Conduct after several police officers improperly entered his home, pepper-sprayed the defendant, pepper-sprayed and tasered the defendant and other occupants, and used further excessive force against the defendant and his adult guests. A jury agreed, finding the defendant not guilty on all counts.

Third District Court - Salt Lake City (2006)
In 2006, a female junior high school teacher was accused of sexually abusing a 13-year-old female student during the 1994-1995 school year. The teacher faced several felony counts, requiring mandatory prison. After presenting the case to a jury, the jury found the teacher not guilty on all counts.

West Jordan Justice Court (November 2006)
An elementary school teacher was charged with Child Abuse With Injury for allegedly harming a student at school. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat secured a not guilty verdict at a jury trial.

Third District Court - Summit County, Case No. 031500228
A daycare provider was charged with Second Degree Felony Child Abuse. The charges stemmed from injuries sustained by a one-year-old child due to suspected "shaken baby" conduct. Represented by another law firm, the defendant was initially convicted at a trial. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat became involved after the verdict and just prior to sentencing. The Court granted a new trial when it was shown that the jury instructions were incorrect. Additionally, new evidence was obtained showing that material information had been withheld by the treating hospital and investigative team. The case was retried with Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat as counsel. Upon retrial, the defendant was found not guilty.

Third District Court - Summit County, Case No. 001600152
A long-time high school shop teacher was charged with eight felony counts of theft and failure to pay over public money by purportedly exercising unauthorized control over school property. Based upon motions made by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat and after a jury trial in the matter, each count was either dismissed or the defendant was found not guilty by a jury, resulting in a final judgment of complete acquittal on all charges.

Fourth District Court - Millard County, Case Nos. 961401005FS, 961401003; also 985 P.2d 919 (Utah App. 1999)
A public official was charged with a variety of public corruption charges. Over the course of litigation spanning several years, three separate trials and appeals, the defendant was ultimately acquitted and found not guilty of all charged felonies.

818 F.2d 725 (10th Cir. 1987)
Officers discovered 650 pounds of marijuana that had been flown into the Milford airport in Beaver County, Utah. Both pilot and passenger were charged with federal drug offenses. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat filed a motion to suppress, arguing that law enforcement had improperly searched the hangar and aircraft without a properly obtained warrant. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. The evidence was suppressed and the case was dismissed.

U.S. District Court - District of Utah, Case No. 94-CR-114G
The defendant was the driver of a car that was stopped in Richfield, Utah. The officers detained the driver and took the car to a shop where several pounds of methamphetamine were found in a hidden compartment. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat successfully argued that law enforcement had no basis to take the vehicle to the body shop. The federal district court judge agreed and ordered that the "evidence discovered through the invasive search of the interior of the car must be suppressed."

Third District Court - Summit County (June 2009)
The defendant was charged with felony Possession of a Controlled Substance with Intent to Distribute and Possession of a Controlled Substance after Utah Highway Patrol troopers stopped the defendant while he was driving on I-80 in Summit County and found eight pounds of marijuana in the defendant's trunk. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat challenged the basis of the stop and search, and the District Court granted the motion to suppress the evidence found. The case was dismissed by the government.

Eighth District Court - Vernal
A driver was stopped by a Uintah County Sheriff's Deputy for a claimed window tint violation. Another officer from the Vernal City Police Department was called to bring out his K-9 dog. A search revealed methamphetamine and marijuana. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat moved to suppress the evidence. Prior to the actual suppression hearing, the County Attorney agreed to suspend prosecution, and the case was eventually dismissed.

U.S. District Court - District of Utah, Case No. 2:99CR-541K
The defendant (driver) and a co-defendant (passenger) were stopped by the Utah Highway Patrol on I-70 in Sevier County for alleged speeding. The officer claimed to be able to smell raw marijuana. After a search of the vehicle, officers located a small amount of marijuana residue and a large amount of cocaine. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat moved to suppress the drug evidence, arguing that the officer could not justify the detention and search. The federal district court agreed, concluding that officers illegally detained the defendant and the search, without consent, violated the Fourth Amendment.

U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Case No. 2:04CR-00100DB
The defendant was a passenger in a vehicle that was pulled over for a traffic violation outside of Richfield, Utah, on I-70. The police used a drug-sniffing dog and claimed that the animal had "hit" on the vehicle. A law enforcement search then revealed controlled substances in the car. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat challenged the traffic stop as well as the use of the dog. At a hearing it was shown that the officer did not have a legitimate basis to search and that the dog was not reliable. The federal district court granted the defendant's motion to suppress all of the evidence. Left with no case, the government moved to dismiss.

U.S. District Court - District of Utah (May 2006)
The defendant was charged with Possession of Controlled Substance (marijuana) in Zions National Park. The federal district court granted the motion to suppress filed by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat based upon the unconstitutional search and seizure. Thereafter, the District Court granted the client's expungement of the federal arrest record in March 2010.

774 P.2d 506 (Utah 1989)
The defendant was arrested in Salt Lake City when she was found in a vehicle where heroin was located. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat moved to suppress the drug evidence. The motion was denied in the trial court. However, the Utah Supreme Court reversed, finding the officer's search was improper.

Third District Court - Salt Lake City (August 2009)
The defendant was charged with ten state felonies involving possession of child pornography after agents from the Utah Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force entered his home and searched and questioned the defendant and his wife. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat filed a motion to suppress all evidence found and provided facts to the Court that law enforcement officers told lies in order to get into a private citizen's home without a warrant. The District Court granted the motion, agreeing with each argument raised by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat. The case was dismissed.

Salt Lake City Court (August 2009)
The defendant was pulled over for a traffic violation and the officer smelled alcohol. The defendant performed field sobriety tests and performed well. The defendant thereafter refused the chemical breath test. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat filed a motion to suppress, arguing that because the defendant was not impaired, there was no basis to arrest for DUI. The judge granted the defendant's motion on the basis that the officer did not have probable cause to arrest the defendant for DUI. The case was dismissed.

Salt Lake County (November 2006)
The defendant was charged with Possession of Controlled Substance and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia from a traffic stop on I-80. The charges were dismissed with the Government's concession to Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat's motion to suppress based on the unlawful search and seizure that occurred in the matter.

Fourth District Court - Juab County (October 2005)
The defendant was stopped for a minor traffic violation on I-15 near Nephi, Utah, resulting in an improper and illegal search of his vehicle. The defendant was ultimately charged with Carrying a Concealed Weapon. The case was dismissed, however, based upon the Court's granting of Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat's motion to suppress due to the unconstitutional search of the vehicle.

Salt Lake City (April 2004)
The defendant was charged with carrying a concealed weapon through the airport security checkpoint. The Court granted Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat's motion to dismiss based on the argument that the client's conduct did not violate the city ordinance.

Third District Juvenile Court - Salt Lake City (August 2003)
A juvenile was charged, along with several other co-defendants, with felony thefts and burglary. The juvenile and the other co-defendants were "rounded up" and questioned at school. During the questioning, officers acted in a threatening manner. Officers also questioned these students without giving them Miranda warnings. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat sought to exclude all evidence and statements obtained by law enforcement under these coercive circumstances. The Juvenile Court granted the motion, and the case was dismissed.

834 P.2d 592 (Utah 1992)
The defendant was charged with felony burglary of a dwelling after he was arrested and made incriminating statements to officers. However, because these statements were made after the defendant was given his Miranda rights but had not assuredly waived them, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat asked that all evidence be suppressed because of the improper and coercive arrest. The Court of Appeals agreed and found that police officers lacked the required probable cause for arrest so that all subsequent statements had to be excluded.

Salt Lake City Justice Court (June 2006)
The defendant was stopped by a Salt Lake City Police officer arriving in the area of a reported fight when he allegedly noticed the defendant's vehicle "take off at a high rate of speed." Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat moved to suppress any evidence obtained since officers stopped the defendant without reason to believe he had committed any crime. The motion was granted, and the case was dismissed.

Taylorsville Justice Court (Dec. 2005)
The defendant was charged with Domestic Violence Assault. Prior to trial, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat filed a motion to exclude the alleged victim's statements. Initially granting that motion, the Court thereafter granted the motion to dismiss based upon the City's inability to present the alleged victim's testimony.

2004 UT App 212
Represented initially by another law firm, a physician had been convicted of three counts of Unlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat became involved after the trial and appealed the convictions on several issues, including the issues of an invalid warrant, improper jury instructions, and the failure by the State to disclose to the defense material information. The appellate court reversed the defendant's convictions, accepting Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat's arguments.

Fourth District Court-Wasatch County (2010)
The defendant was accused of theft of property in Wasatch County connected to the foreclosure of his condominium. Charges against the defendant were dismissed following Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat's investigation and presentation of legal arguments and discovered evidence to the County Attorney.

Third District Court-Salt Lake City (2009)
The defendant was charged with making threats and retaliating against a witness. The charges were dismissed prior to the preliminary hearing after extensive investigation and research by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat persuaded the County Attorney to dismiss the case.

Third District Court-Salt Lake City (2009)
The defendant was charged with felony child abuse. The charges against the defendant were dismissed prior to trial following the investigation of claims and presentation of evidence to the District Attorney.

Third District Court-West Jordan (June 2008)
Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat represented a young female defendant, in conjunction with a co-defendant, who was employed by a troubled youth residential facility. The defendant and co-defendant were criminally charged with a felony offense for the failure, as caretakers, to provide proper care, supervision, or medical care to a teenage boy who died while at the facility. After evidence was presented at the preliminary hearing, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat argued forcefully to dismiss the case. The District Court agreed, and the case was dismissed for insufficient evidence of a crime.

Third District Court-West Jordan (2008)
The defendant was charged with second degree felony theft as a result of claims made by defendant's previous employers. After substantial investigation, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat convinced the prosecutor that the complaining witnesses were not credible and had fabricated the claims to make good on a threat. The prosecutor dismissed the case.

First District Court-Cache County (2008)
A college sorority was charged with hazing, a third degree felony, in connection with the death of a fraternity pledge due to alcohol poisoning. Charges against the sorority were dismissed by the County Attorney following extensive investigation and research by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat regarding legal issues related to criminal liability of fraternal organizations.

First District Court-Cache County (2008)
The defendant was charged with distribution and possession of cocaine and giving false information to a police officer in Logan, Utah, based on allegations that he planted cocaine in an effort to frame a local politician. Charges were dismissed by the prosecution following extensive investigation and presentation of findings to the County Attorney.

Salt Lake City Justice Court (2008)
An on-duty employee of a local public utility company was charged criminally with negligent collision for hitting a bicyclist with a City-owned vehicle. The case was dismissed based upon the showing by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat that the defendant's conduct was not criminal and did not violate the city ordinance.

Third District Court-West Jordan (2007)
The female defendant was charged with rape and sodomy. Charges against the defendant were dismissed by the prosecution prior to trial following further investigation and insight into the alleged victim's claims.

U.S. District Court-District of Utah (2006)
A pilot was federally charged with operating a commercial plane while under the influence of alcohol. The case was dismissed by the Government for insufficient evidence and after research and information was accumulated by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat.

Salt Lake County (November 2006)
The defendant and his company were charged in federal court with theft of petroleum in a multi-state conspiracy. Charges against the defendants were dismissed before trial following extensive investigation and research by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat and consultation with the United States Attorney's office.

Third District Court-Salt Lake City (2004)
Sexual abuse charges against an LDS bishop were dismissed following an investigation by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat that revealed the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations.

Fourth District Court-Utah County (2003)
The defendant was charged with sexual abuse of a child in Provo, Utah. The case was dismissed by the prosecution at the preliminary hearing when, upon cross-examination by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat attorneys, it was revealed that the victim was unable to identify the defendant or verify the details of her story.

Third District Court-Salt Lake City (April 2003)
The defendant was charged with selling a vehicle and "turning back" the odometer in violation of Utah law. The District Court dismissed the case, accepting Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat's motion that the State did not present evidence of the defendant's actions which actually violated Utah law.

Third District Court-Tooele County (2002)
The defendant was involved in an altercation in Tooele, which resulted in felony aggravated assault charges being filed. Through the extensive investigation done by Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat prior to trial, the prosecutor dismissed the case following opening statements and consultation with Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat regarding the firm's investigation, which revealed a key eyewitness who had never been interviewed by police. This witness's statement revealed numerous inconsistencies with statements of prosecution witnesses.

562 F.3d 1092 (10th Cir. 2009)
Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat was appointed to represent a defendant on appeal who had been convicted and sentenced on federal charges of  "conspiracy to interfere with civil rights and aiding and abetting the interference with a federally protected activity." Said more simply, the defendant was an accused leader of a white supremist organization who was accused of minor participation in two local bar fights in Salt Lake City. Literally, a "federal case" was made out of what should have been two misdemeanor charges of assault. The defendant was sentenced to 87 months in federal prison. After looking at the facts of the case, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the defendant was erroneously sentenced based upon federal sentencing guideline provisions that did not apply, resulting in a substantial sentencing decrease. Upon resentencing, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat secured a sentence that was approximately 50 months less than the original sentence, and the defendant was released shortly after resentencing.

405 F.3d 1060 (10th Cir. 2005)
Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat represented a federal court clerk charged, along with her husband, of obstruction of justice and accessory (aiding and abetting) in the distribution of a controlled substance. After the defendant was convicted, the United States Supreme Court issued its crucial opinion of United States v. Booker, calling into question the constitutionality of the Federal Sentencing Guideline scheme. Recognizing the issues applied directly to Ms. Lang, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat immediately argued for the application of the new ruling to Ms. Lang's sentence, and the Tenth Circuit remanded the case for resentencing consistent with the new decision. In doing so, Ms. Lang's sentence was substantially decreased, and she was ultimately released after being given credit for time served.

Board of Pardons (2010)
The defendant requested a pardon of a 1992 conviction of sexual exploitation and forcible sex abuse. The defendant always maintained her innocence and passed polygraph testing. Subsequently, in 2005, the defendant's alleged victim recanted, affirmatively confirming that the defendant never sexually abused her. After initially seeking post-conviction relief, but being barred due to the time span at issue, the defendant sought a pardon of her convictions. The pardon was granted.

Third District/Fifth District Courts (May 2006)
Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat secured a successful nunc pro tunc (backdated) dismissal of two separate felony cases for its client, resulting in the successful expungement of all charges from five separate criminal cases. This allowed the client to obtain a liquor license for a managerial position at a well known restaurant.

2007 UT 14
In an almost 20-year-old case, an innocent man was convicted of the murder of a child who died from injuries purportedly sustained from "shaken baby syndrome." He was sentenced to a term of five years to life in prison. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat became involved after the verdict and after the defendant was already serving a prison sentence. After discovering new evidence that showed that the defendant could not have committed the offense, a motion for new trial was filed. Based upon this new evidence, and prior to the full appeal being heard, Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat secured the defendant's release from prison. The Utah Supreme Court thereafter reversed the conviction. Based upon the newly discovered evidence establishing the defendant's innocence, the State dismissed the case without retrial.

Third District Court-Summit County, Case No. 031500082
The defendant was charged with murder in an apartment in Park City, Utah. Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat presented the defendant's self-defense case to the jury. The first jury could not reach a unanimous verdict, resulting in a hung jury. The case was retried, and the second jury also did not find the defendant guilty of murder, but guilty of the lesser offense of manslaughter.

Third District Court-Salt Lake City (1998)
The defendant was charged with first degree murder and faced a possible life sentence in prison. After presenting evidence to the jury, the defendant was found guilty of the lesser offense of manslaughter.

Attorneys from Brown, Bradshaw & Moffat are specially qualified to represent individuals facing the death penalty and have served as counsel in the following capital cases:

Mr. Heffelfinger was charged, among other things, with capital murder in Daggett County. A plea was negotiated wherein Mr. Heffelfinger pleaded guilty to aggravated murder, but the possibility of the death penalty was removed, and Mr. Heffelfinger received a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

Mr. Mullins was a juvenile at the time he was charged with aggravated murder in Sevier County. The case was resolved with a plea by which the possibility of the death penalty was removed.

Mr. Merrill was charged with aggravated murder in Emery County. Mr. Merrill ultimately entered a no contest plea to murder and the possibility of the death penalty was removed.

Mr. Tuttle was convicted by a jury of capital murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the conviction was reduced to second degree murder.

Mr. Mitchell was convicted of capital murder. He received a life sentence after the first trial. On appeal, his conviction was reversed. He was tried a second time and convicted of manslaughter.

Mr. Cronin was charged with capital murder in New Mexico. The case was tried to a jury, and the jury returned a verdict of manslaughter.

Mr. Pearson was charged with capital murder. The jury returned a verdict of capital murder, and the penalty phase resulted in a life sentence with the possibility of parole.

Mr. Young's conviction and death sentence were reversed by the Utah Supreme Court. The case was settled by Mr. Young pleading guilty to aggravated murder; he received a sentence of life without the possibility of parole.

Mr. Cannistraci was charged with aggravated murder. After the preliminary hearing, Mr. Cannistraci entered a guilty plea to manslaughter.

Mr. Salazar pled guilty to capital murder. After a penalty hearing, the judge imposed a life sentence.

Mr. Taylor pled guilty to a non-capital murder.

Mr. Gibbons was charged with aggravated murder. The case was compromised and settled by Mr. Gibbons' plea to a charge of manslaughter.

Mr. Wilson was charged with one count of aggravated burglary, one count of aggravated robbery and one count of aggravated murder. He pled guilty to one count of murder and received five years to life in prison.

Mr. Molina was charged with one count of aggravated murder, one count of aggravated robbery and one count of attempted aggravated murder. He pled guilty to murder and aggravated robbery and received consecutive sentences of five years to life.

Mr. Benvenuto was charged with one count of aggravated murder and one count of attempted aggravated murder. He pled guilty to aggravated murder and received life without the possibility of parole.

Mr. Troyer was charged with one count of capital murder and one count of aggravated burglary. The charges against Mr. Troyer were dismissed on the State's motion prior to trial.

6 P.3d 1120 (Utah 2000)
This case became the seminal and most often cited case in Utah law involving what "prior bad acts" evidence of a defendant may be used in a criminal trial.

972 P.2d 913 (Utah 1998)
The State sought to use Utah's Subpoena Powers Act to coerce testimony and cooperation from potential witnesses to a murder committed in their home. This case first defined the limitations of the Subpoena Powers Act and limited the State's power to use the act.

993 P.2d 854 (Utah 1999), see also 895 P.2d 359 (Utah 1995)
The defendant was charged with murder and attempted murder and pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. This case became the seminal Utah case challenging the ultimate elimination of a true insanity defense in Utah.

780 P.2d 1203 (Utah 1989); Tuttle v. State of Utah, 57 F.3d 879 (10th Cir. 1995)
The defendant was convicted of first degree murder. The case was appealed and the appellate court reversed. Of importance, the Tuttle cases made state law regarding the use and unreliability of hypnotically enhanced testimony at trial.

868 P.2d 108 (Utah App. 1994)
The defendant was convicted of kidnapping and forcible sexual abuse. This case importantly delineated the Utah rule that consecutive sentences may not be aggregated to exceed 30 years and the exceptions to it.

842 P.2d 843 (Utah 1992)
The defendant was charged with various counts of murder and attempted murder. This case ultimately redefined what is required under Utah law to convict a person for "attempted" murder. As the Supreme Court reversed the conviction, it found there could be no crime of attempted "depraved indifference" murder.

779 P.2d 1116 (Utah 1989); State v. Mitchell, 824 P.2d 469 (Utah App. 1991)
The defendant was convicted of first degree murder following a jury trial. The case was appealed and reversed, resulting in a new trial. On retrial, the defendant was convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter. The case was appealed again, and state law was made regarding the use and unreliability of post-hypnotic testimony at trial. Ultimately, the Utah Supreme Court agreed that hypnotically enhanced testimony is inherently unreliable and inadmissible as evidence and that the admission of hypnotically enhanced testimony required reversal.