Stateof Texas vs. Amado Z
Jul 19, 2012OUTCOME: Not Guilty
Indecency with a child by sexual contact
Dallas, TX
Criminal defense Lawyer at Dallas, TX
Practice Areas: Criminal Defense
OUTCOME: Not Guilty
Indecency with a child by sexual contact
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client was accused of five counts of indecency with a child.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client accused of attempted sexual assault. Caught purported victim in numerous lies.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client charged with Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child. Discredited child and mother based on jealousy and anger over the recent break up of client and mother.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client was charged with murder. Two groups of men were in an altercation after a bar closed. Witnesses claimed Client was the shooter. Cross examination established that the witnesses had a bias again ... st the client.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client accused of Capital Murder. Witnesses said that they saw the Defendant shoot a man at a service station. Cross-examination of these witnesses revealed that their testimony was unreliable.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client was employee of IRS who was accused of embezzling tax payments. My investigation uncovered the fact that the government's witness had a relative (ex-con) who worked for the janitorial service u ... sed by the IRS at that location. Presented testimony that suggested that her testimony was fabricated to protect that relative.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client was charged with stabbing a homeless man under a bridge. The only eye-witness was discredited.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client was charged with three counts of murder. Witnesses said that Client and his brothers opened fire on the victims in an apartment complex common area. Forensic testimony proved that the victims h ... ad been shot by either each other or the prosecution witnesses.
OUTCOME: Jury Verdict of Not Guilty
Client was accused of murder. State witnesses testified that the client had fired an assault rifle at a house where a party was being held. Cross examination of witnesses discredited their testimony.