Client was facing three felony charges—Forgery under Penal Code § 470(d), Burglary under Penal Code § 459, and Attempted Grand Theft under Penal Code § 664—after a car dealership accused him of trying to fraudulently purchase a vehicle. Following a contested preliminary hearing, all charges were dismissed.
The case began when our client attempted to purchase a used vehicle and provided paperwork that included an employer verification number. The dealership became suspicious when the number did not connect to a real employer, and the client was arrested. He was accused of providing fake employment documents and attempting to steal a car through fraudulent financing.
From the start, we investigated the dealership’s allegations and presented the prosecution with statements showing that the witnesses could not identify our client as having attempted to steal a car or leave the lot without paying. Further, we prepared to challenge the legal sufficiency of the charges themselves.
At the preliminary hearing, we methodically went through the legal elements of each charge. We demonstrated that the documents provided by the client (employment verification and credit application forms) did not qualify as “forgery items” under Penal Code § 470(d). Of the 89 listed forgeable items in the statute, none applied to the documents in question.
We also discredited the attempted grand theft allegation by showing that our client brought real cash for a down payment and used his true personal information on all documents, including his full name, Social Security number, and address. As we argued to the court, a person attempting to steal a car would not provide all real identifying information.
By the end of the preliminary hearing, it was clear that the state could not meet its burden. All three felony charges were dismissed in their entirety, and the client avoided trial, prison exposure, and a felony record.