A Griffin Law Office client was attempting to purchase a vehicle at a used car dealership. When the car salesman called to verify the client’s employer, the number given was fake, and the employer didn’t exist.
The client was arrested for allegedly violating:
Penal Code § 470(d) – Forgery of Documents
Penal Code § 459 – Burglary (Felony)
Penal Code § 664 – Attempted Grand Theft
Our office turned over the statements to the prosecution. This led the prosecution to investigate further and re-interview several witnesses present on the day of the thefts. Upon re-interviewing, all witnesses said that they never saw our client during the alleged incidents.
Finally, at the preliminary hearing, once all the evidence was brought to light, the case was dismissed. The client was prepared to purchase the vehicle and had a cash down payment in hand at the dealership. Still, the faulty documents showing a fake employer and fake credit approval prompted concern by the dealership and eventually, an arrest.
However, out of the eighty-nine items listed under the forgery statute that can be applicable for this charge, neither an employment pay stub now a credit application were listed. At the Preliminary Hearing, Mr. Griffin was able to bring this to light to the District Attorney, proving that this charge didn’t apply to our client. Mr. Griffin emphasized to the judge that the documents listed under this statute were listed for a reason, and the faulty documents produced by the client weren’t on that list.
Mr. Griffin of the Griffin Law Office also diligently proved to the court that there was no evidence that our client had the intention of stealing a vehicle or even tried to drive away in an un-purchased vehicle. With the absence of that, the attempted grand theft charge wasn’t applicable. The client had an appropriate amount of cash with him at the dealership, ready to make a down payment. Still, the real evidence against this charge was that the client used all of his real personal information (social security number, name, address, birth date, etc.) on all of the faulty documents. Mr. Griffin expressed to the court that a person who wants to steal a car would not provide all real contact information in order to do so. The judge agreed. Due to Mr. Griffin’s effort in specific look into each item listed under forgeable items under the Forgery Penal Code and going down the list one by one to make sure that none of those documents applied to our client, he was able to get all three felony charges wholly dismissed without having to even go to trial.