Joseph Adam Levin

I hired Joe Levin to represent me in a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). I had the police come and serve me the (TRO) and at that time they also seized my guns from me. Mr. Levin worked hard and diligently to get my (TRO) dropped and also went above and beyond to get my guns and my second amendment ...rights reinstated. I would highly recommend Mr. Levin’s services if you are looking for an honest and professional criminal lawyer.

I interviewed several attorneys before picking Mr. Levin to represent me. He stood out from everyone else, with his intelligent, honest and straightforward approach. Throughout the matter, Joe was extremely compassionate, and genuinely cared about the outcome. Ultimately Joe was able to achieve an ou...tcome that was very favorable. Consider his fee an investment, he's an outstanding lawyer.

He was hired February 2013 to represent me against false charges, but he continually misles us about the law and failed to obtain the reasonable amount of evidence. We retained him for 3years and the case went unindicted for the first year and a half. During that time we asked him to get certain ...evidence for my defense such as the security camera footage and my work record. He lied to us saying that those stuff would be turned over at indictment. For 3 years he failed to get those, and when we finally agreed to leave him, he finally subpoenaed my work record, which by that time was missing 3 additional years of alibis. The rules of court state that the defence can have a probable cause hearing if an indictment has not yet been made. He failed to tell us about this, continually misleasing us by saying we can't do anything until indictment. Usually, an indictment is made 2 months after a charge, unless your innocent like me. We had an entire year and a half which was wasted by Levin. A probable cause hearing is the ONLY opportunity that the defence has to hear prosecution witnesses before trial (i.e. the cops story, which will no doubt be laced with falsehoods). There are no depositions in criminal matters, only civil. He kept trying to force the plea offer on us. He refused to take our case to trial and tried to blackmail us by telling us he wouldn't take the matter to trial. The rules of court prohibit anyone who was coerced into taking a plea by this manner from being convicted since the plea would no be voluntary. What's worse is that even though it was Levin who wanted a plea while we wanted to proceed to trial, he never tried to procure a better plea offer. Instead, he did whatever the prosecutor asked of him, even if it meant violating my rights. The court rules state that the handwritten police notes (which would have helped our case) must be turned over after indictment within 60 days. A year and a half went by after indictment with him still on the case with him telling us that there were no more reports. For the charges I have, case law specifically says the defence is entitled to the evidence via a protective order for the defence expert. The expert we hired specifically asked for this. Instead, he made the expert drive to the state police who refused him initially access to the evidence until after he had examined all their "data" and basically written their report for them. All this time we were billed at a rate of 200 an hour including the travel expense. Then, when he was finally allowed to examine the evidence at the state police lab and not his own where his equipment was, the expert was given only a week time (it took the state police took 2 years for their report which failed to name any specific contraband and was completely useless for the defense) and then told by Levin that the police would not give him any more time (he should have motioned for the charges to be dismissed at that point). He failed to get the grand jury transcripts for over a year after indictment even though we continually asked him. He failed to tell us grand jury transcripts existed for the warrant and we never got those. He failed to get us a list of all the officers present who conducted the search on our home. The rules of court state that the defence needs to request evidence via a bill of particulars. The indictment was made entirely based on the hearsay testimony of a single officer. We were either entitled to a dismissal of indictment or else able to request anything from the state as the vagueness of the accusation could not allow us to formulate a defense. He failed to do so, instead opting to "extend a professional courteousy to the prosecutor." This is what was written in the letter from the prosecutor after he gave us that report which failed to identify any contraband. The prosecutor never provided a post indictment discovery as he was supposed to and we weren't told by Levin.