Justin A. Okezie, Esq. is an aggressive, creative, dedicated, and experienced attorney who represents clients in local and federal courts in the District of Columbia and Maryland (Montgomery and Prince George's Counties) who have been charged with criminal offenses or who have suffered serious personal injuries.
Mr. Okezie is honored to have earned an AV® Preeminent Rating - the highest rating available from Martindale-Hubbell, the leading independent attorney rating entity. An AV® Rating signifies that the lawyer has reached the heights of professional excellence; he or she has practiced law for a number of years, and is recognized for the highest levels of skill and integrity.
Mr. Okezie was selected by The National Trial Lawyers: Top 100, an invitation-only organization composed of the premier trial lawyers from each state in the nation who meet stringent qualifications as civil plaintiff and/or criminal defense trial lawyers. Membership is extended solely to the select few of the most qualified attorneys from each state who demonstrate superior qualifications of leadership, reputation, influence, stature and public profile.
Mr. Okezie received his Bachelor’s Degree (with High Honors)in History/Political Science from Rutgers University in 1996 and his Juris Doctorate (Cum Laude) from DukeUniversityLawSchool in 1999.
After graduating from law school, Mr. Okezie accepted a position as an associate at Covington & Burling, one of the most prestigious law firms in the United States, where he worked with renowned criminal defense attorneys in the field of “white collar” criminal defense. Mr. Okezie then worked at Brown, Goldstein & Levy, a boutique litigation law firm, where he worked on civil rights, criminal defense, and commercial civil litigation cases.
Mr. Okezie started his own law practice in 2002. He represents clients facing a variety of criminal charges, including murder, sexual assault, robbery, burglary, kidnapping, narcotics possession and distribution, gun possession, driving while intoxicated, and “white collar” criminal offenses such as Medicaid fraud and embezzlement. He also represents clients who need to be fairly compensated for their serious personal injuries.
Mr. Okezie is client-focused, in that he approaches each case individually, always focusing on each client’s personal needs and goals. He provides his clients with quality legal services in a cost-efficient manner in order to try to meet each client’s particular needs and goals.
Mr. Okezie is result-oriented, in that he searches for and considers a wide array of potential outcomes and ways to achieve them, whether this entails moving to suppress and exclude unlawfully-obtained evidence and statements, moving to dismiss a case at an early juncture, obtaining an agreement that substantially reduces the likely sentence that a client may face and that might ultimately result in dismissal of a case, or taking any other legal recourse that is appropriate based on the circumstances of a specific case.
Of course, when a trial is necessary to achieve a client’s interests, Mr. Okezie is prepared to proceed to trial and aggressively challenge the prosecution in open court. To accomplish this, Mr. Okezie utilizes an experienced criminal investigator, who helps him thoroughly investigate the actual facts that underlie the case (rather than merely accepting the police department’s often biased view of the facts), presents arguments to undermine the prosecutor’s evidence and, when appropriate, offers evidence and testimony, all in an effort to achieve a verdict of “not guilty” on behalf of his client.
Mr. Okezie has been lead defense counsel in over 100 criminal trials and has represented well over 1,000 clients facing criminal charges. He has also litigated numerous cases for clients who have suffered serious personal injuries in order obtain fair compensation for his clients.
Mr. Okezie is on the cutting-edge of new developments in the ever-changing field of criminal law, criminal procedure, and litigation strategy. He contributes to the legal community with his expertise and experience and has been invited to participate in numerous judicial committees, as well as legal education courses and seminars, where he has lectured Judges on recent legal developments in the criminal field and trained attorneys in trial practice, criminal law, and criminal procedure. Mr. Okezie is fluent in English and Spanish.
19 years, 1,650 cases
19 years, 95 cases
19 years, 85 cases
19 years, 46 cases
|Award name||Grantor||Date granted|
|AV Peer Review Rating||Martindale-Hubbell||2017|
|Top 100 Trial Lawyers||National Trial Lawyers||2014|
|Duke Law Certificate for Accomplishment of Pro Bono Service Goal||Duke University School of Law||1999|
|Managing Partner||The Law Office of Justin A. Okezie, PC||2002 - Present|
|Associate||Brown Goldstein & Levy||2000 - 2001|
|Associate||Covington & Burling||1999 - 2000|
|Association name||Position name||Duration|
|Advisory Committee to Judicial Committee on District of Columbia Superior Court Criminal Justice Act Panel Admissions||Committee Member||2017 - Present|
|D.C. Superior Court Criminal Rules Advisory Committee||Committee Member||2016 - Present|
|District of Columbia Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association||Member||2008 - Present|
|U.S. District Court for the District of the District of Columbia Bar||Member||2007 - Present|
|U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland Bar||Member||2004 - Present|
|District of Columbia Bar||Member||2002 - Present|
|Maryland State Bar Association||Member||2001 - Present|
|District of Columbia Bar||D.C. Criminal Law Steering Committee, Elected Member||2014 - 2015|
|District of Columbia Judicial and Bar Conference||Delegate Member||2013 - 2013|
|District of Columbia Judicial and Bar Conference||Delegate Member||2011 - 2011|
|District of Columbia Superior Court Attorney Practice Standards for Criminal Defense||Committee Member||2009 - 2009|
|Advisory Committee to Judicial Committee on District of Columbia Superior Court Criminal Justice Act Panel Admissions||Committee Member||2009 - 2011|
|Trial counsel in case where arguments to trial judge helped lay foundation for appellate reversal of trial judge’s factual findings for attempted cruelty to children conviction based upon inherent incredibility doctrine.||Slater-El v. United States, 142 A.3d 530 (D.C. 2016)||2016|
|Trial counsel; cross-examination and arguments allowed for reversal of attempted possession of a controlled substance where there was insufficient evidence presented at trial.||Campbell v. United States, No. 14-CM-782 (D.C. 2016)||2016|
|Trial counsel in case where cross-examination, arguments, and requests for specific findings under Rule 23(c) resulted in appellate court remanding case for finding regarding defense of property.||Saidi v. United States, 110 A.3d 606 (D.C. 2015)||2015|
|Trial counsel in case where client acquitted of all charges but arguments and requests for exculpatory materials at trial level laid foundation for reversals of co-defendants’ convictions due to Brady v. Maryland violation by the government.||Vaughn v. United States, 93 A.3d 1237 (D.C. 2014)||2014|
|Litigated case of first impression after appellate decision in Robertson v. United State ex rel. Watson.||Porter v. Jones, 139 D.W.L.R. 1777 (Aug. 15, 2011; J. Stuart Nash, D.C. Superior Court)||2011|
|Court struck testimony of police officer who effectuated traffic stop; defense argued that government failed to preserve a document, namely a PD 256 Quick Booking Form, that the testifying police officer prepared and failed to preserve.||United States v. Harris, 137 D.W.L.R. 429 (Oct. 29, 2008; J. Kaye Christian; D.C. Superior Court)||2011|
|Assault and battery claims were not barred by the notice requirements in D.C. Code § 12-309.||Jones v. Ritter, 587 F. Supp. 2d 152 (D.D.C. 2008)||2008|
|HOW. L.J. 535 (1999) (co-edited by Justin A. Okezie)||Business and Brotherhood, Can They Coincide?||1999|
|6 AM. U.J. GENDER & L. 557||The Presumption of Guilt and Compulsory HIV Testing of Sex Offenders||1998|
|Duke University School of Law||JD - Juris Doctor (Cum Laude)||1999|
|Rutgers University||BA - Bachelor of Arts (High Honors)||1996|
|D.C. Superior Court Judicial Training||District of Columbia Court of Appeals and United States Supreme Court Case Updates of 2016||2016|
|Intensive Litigation Skills Training||Criminal Defense & Trial Skills Practice||2014|
|D.C. Superior Court Judicial Training||District of Columbia Court of Appeals and United States Supreme Court Case Updates of 2014||2014|
|D.C. Superior Court Judicial Training||District of Columbia Court of Appeals and United States Supreme Court Case Updates of 2013||2013|
|D.C. Superior Court Judicial Training||District of Columbia Court of Appeals and United States Supreme Court Case Updates of 2012||2012|
|District of Columbia Bar||Voluntary Sentencing Guidelines Presentation||2011|
|United States v. W.E.||Not Guilty|
|United States v. C.R.||Not Guilty|
|United States v. P.G.||Case Dismissed Prior to Trial Based Upon Motion to Suppress Evidence|
|United States v. L.G.||Not Guilty|
|United States v. R.J.||Evidence Suppressed; Case Dismissed|
|United States v. B.F.||Not Guilty|
|United States v. L.P.||Not Guilty|
|United States v. F.H.||Not Guilty|
|United States v. S.D.||Not Guilty|
|United States v. G.H.||Not Guilty on Majority of Counts; Hung Jury on the Remainder; No Retrial and Dismissal of Remaining Charges|
|United States v. L.M.||Evidence Suppressed; Case Dismissed|
|United States v. C.M.||Not Guilty On Majority of Counts|
|S.J. v. District of Columba, Police Officers Individually||Plaintiff Prevails on Motion, Later Achieves Sizeable Settlement in Police Brutality Case|
|United States v. J.H.||Police Testimony Stricken; Case Dismissed|
Posted by Kathleen
Fri Aug 16 2019
Posted by anonymous
Thu Aug 17 2017
Posted by anonymous
Mon Aug 07 2017
Posted by Ray
Sun Aug 06 2017
Posted by anonymous
Wed Dec 31 2014
Posted by anonymous
Fri Aug 01 2014
Posted by anonymous
Thu Jul 31 2014
Posted by anonymous
Sun Jul 27 2014
Posted by Robert
Sat Jul 26 2014
Posted by Quintel
Mon Jun 16 2014