Skip to main content
Michael R. Bartish
Avvo
Pro

Michael Bartish’s Legal Cases

14 total


  • United States v. W.L.

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Outcome:
    Client acquitted of lone contested charge.
    Description:
    Client was accused of being a felon in possession of a firearm and possession of cocaine base after the vehicle in which he was a passenger was pulled over. As the police officer approached the vehicle the client exited the vehicle and fled on foot. The client was eventually tackled and arrested. After the client was subdued, the officer's searched the vehicle and found a hand gun in the rear passenger well. The client was facing a 10 year sentence if convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. At trial we were able to show the that officer's version of events regarding how the weapon was discovered and where the weapon was discovered during the search of the vehicle did not make sense and was not credible. The client explained that he ran from the officers due to the crack cocaine in his possession and had no idea that there was even a weapon in the car. The client was convicted of possessing crack cocaine (a 1 year misdemeanor) and acquitted of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
  • United States v. S.F.

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Nov 08, 2010
    Outcome:
    6th Circuit Victory and Significant Sentence Reduction
    Description:
    Client was charged in the Western District of Michigan with Distribution of More than 5 grams of Cocaine Base, a 10 year to life offense, after he acted as the middleman in a drug transaction between a confidential informant and a bigger drug dealer. Unfortunately for the client, he had two prior felony offenses in 1994 - Delivery/Manufacture of more than 50 grams of cocaine and Assault with Intent to Commit Sexual Penetration. The United States Probation Department classified the client as a Career Offender pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b)(A) based upon the client’s prior felony controlled substance delivery convictions and his assault with intent to commit sexual conduct involving sexual penetration - which was classified as a crime of violence. This classification resulted in a sentencing guideline range of 262 months to 327 months. At the original sentencing hearing, I objected to the client’s classification as a career offender arguing that Assault with Intent to Commit Sexual Conduct involving penetration was not categorically a crime of violence. Ultimately, the District Court did not see it my way and ruled that the client was a career offender. I filed a motion for variance arguing that the career offender guidelines were too harsh especially since my client’s criminal history category absent the career offender tag was level III. The sentencing judge granted the variance motions and sentenced the client to 200 months (the equivalent of a 3 level departure). We appealed to the 6th Circuit. In June, the 6th Circuit heard oral arguments and in September it issued an opinion holding that Assault with Intent to Commit Sexual Conduct was NOT categorically a crime of violence and ordered a remand to determine if any court documents (plea transcripts) existed to indicate whether the specific facts of the client;s case gave an indication of whether the his conviction was a crime of violence. At re-sentencing, the government could not produce any court documents or plea transcripts regarding the client's conviction and conceded that no evidence existed to support a career offender classification. the client's guidelines dropped to 87-105 months. The sentencing judge imposed a sentence of 74 months (the same percentage off the maximum of the guideline range as he did at the original sentencing hearing). In one day, the client went from a 200 month sentence to a 74 month sentence. He should get out in approximately 3 and ½ years with good time credit.
  • United States v. Timothy Gibbs

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Outcome:
    At resentencing hearing, the district court ordered both sentences to run concurrently. Client's overall sentence was reduced by five years.
    Description:
    Published decision with the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. U.S. District Court imposed federal sentence to run consecutive to state sentence due to mistaken belief that it was required. Mr. Bartish appealed the case to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that state and federal sentence should run concurrently. The 6th Circuit agreed and remanded the case for re-sentencing in a published decision.
  • People v. J.N.

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Outcome:
    Evidence was suppressed and the case was dismissed.
    Description:
    Client was arrested for possession of marijuana after officers approached his parked vehicle in a grocery store parking lot. We filed a motion to suppress the evidence on the grounds that the officers did not have probable cause to approach and search the vehicle. Judge Servass of the 63rd District Court agreed and the evidence was suppressed.
  • U.S. v. MM

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Outcome:
    Client received a significantly lower sentence than recommended by the guidelines.
    Description:
    Client was accused and pled guilty to distribution of 5 kilograms of cocaine. The Presentence Investigation report recommended a sentencing guideline range of 121-158 months. We filed objection to the sentencing guideline scoring arguing that the correct guideline range was 97 - 121. That objection was granted. We also filed a motion for variance arguing that a sentencing within the guideline range was also too high. Judge Neff agreed and sentenced the client to 72 months - one year over the mandatory minimum sentence.
  • United States v. Raogo Ouedraogo

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Outcome:
    Murder conviction overturned, Judgement of Acquittal Granted. Client released from jail days before Christmas
    Description:
    Client was charged with Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud, Conspiracy to Commit Interstate Murder for Hire, Kidnapping, and Kidnapping Resulting in Death. Client was convicted after a 30 day jury trial of Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud, Kidnapping, and Kidnapping Resulting in Death and was facing a mandatory life sentence. We filed a motion for judgment of acquittal not withstanding the verdict and a motion for a new trial. The judge granted our motion and acquitted our client of all counts. Client was set free just before Christmas, 2012.
  • People v. K.A.

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Jan 18, 2012
    Outcome:
    Case dismissed following successful suppression motion.
    Description:
    Client was charged with Operating While Intoxicated after being pulled over for speeding and a busted front headlight. Client data master result was .13. Prior to his arrest, our client submitted to a preliminary breath test and several field sobriety test which the arresting officer stated that he failed. We requested the dash board video from the officers cruiser. The video revealed that the client actually performed very well on the filed sobriety tests and that the officer failed to comply with the administrative rules before administering the preliminary breath test. We filed a motion to suppress the results's which he We filed a motion to suppress on the grounds that the officer did not have probable cause to arrest our client due to his failure to follow the administrative rules while administering the PBT. We further argued that our client's performance of the filed sobriety tests was excellent and provided the officer with no probable cause to suspect driving under the influence of alcohol. After a hearing on our motion during which the court viewed the dashboard video, the court agreed and through out the results of the data master on the grounds that the officer had not probable cause to arrest our client and have him submit to a data master test. The case against our client was dismissed and he avoided an OWI conviction.
  • M.M. v. Secretary of State

    Practice Area:
    DUI & DWI
    Date:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Outcome:
    Restoration of client's driving privileges.
    Description:
    Client lost her license after her conviction for her second OWI in June 2010. Client first contact our officer shortly after losing her license to prepare for the process for obtaining her driving privileges again. Our office provided the client with guidance regarding the necessary steps to take to give her the best shot at getting her license back on her first petition following the mandatory one year waiting period. Client followed our instructions to the letter and retained our firm when she petitioned the Secretary of State following her one year waiting period. In preparation for her hearing, we reviewed and edited her support letters, reviewed her alcohol assessment, and ensured that the documents substantiating her one year of sobriety were all in order. The day before the hearing, we prepared her by going over the questions she would likely be asked by the hearing officer. We attended the hearing with our client and ensured that she effectively presented her case for restoration of her driving privileges. Following the hearing, our client was granted full driving privileges with no restrictions on her first attempt before the Secretary of State.
  • People v. M.J.

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    May 17, 2010
    Outcome:
    Not Guilty
    Description:
    Client was charged for domestic against his ex-wife. His wife was attempting to get into his vehicle and remove property that belonged to him. My client restrained his wife to prevent her from entering the vehicle and removing his property. The responding officer's charged him with domestic assault and battery since he touched her without her permission (she suffered no injuries). We convinced the judge to give a defense of property jury instruction over the prosecutor's objection. After a full day trial, the jury acquitted our client after an hour of deliberation.
  • People v. A.P.

    Practice Area:
    Criminal Defense
    Date:
    Nov 05, 2012
    Outcome:
    Motion to suppress was granted and the case was dismissed.
    Description:
    Client was involved in a roll over accident. The police officer responding to the accident searched the vehicle without the drivers consent while the driver sat in the back of the police vehicle and found a marijuana pipe. Client was charged with possession of drug paraphernalia. We filed a motion to suppress arguing that the officer searched the vehicle without consent. The officer testified that he obtained consent while the client was sitting in the police cruiser. At a contested hearing, we were able to show through the circumstances of the offense, the vagueness of the officer's own police report, and the prosecutions failure to obtain the preserve the audio from the police cruiser indicated that the prosecution could not meet the burden of proof to indicate that the consent was specific and unequivocally obtained.