Overall Rating
This is an aggregated review score of Avvo and Lawyers.com reviews.
This is an aggregated review score of Avvo and Lawyers.com reviews.
5.0 /5.0
198 Client Reviews
Showing 41 - 42 of 42 reviews | Lawsuits & Disputes
Posted by anonymous | July 21, 2014
Kyle Bristow--great attorney
Kyle has been a great help to me in removing an unwanted video on the internet. His services were affordable and he has been very responsive to my requests. Though we are still in the process of my case, I am pleased with what he has done so far.
Posted by anonymous | October 17, 2013
Not the trial lawyer I was looking for
Kyle was a good attorney, however I thought that during my trial he didn't preform very well. I would probably seek a more experienced attorney next time.
The following can be corroborated through public court records: This client was charged with fifteen counts of voyeurism between three different jurisdictions. At the jury trial for one of the three cases, evidence that came to light included electronic, time-stamped fingerprints of the defendant at the crime scene on the date and time the crime was alleged to have occurred and incriminatory time-stamped cell phone pictures that featured the alleged victim. The pictures’ metadata was compared with the data from the crime scenes, so the prosecutor was able to demonstrate that: (1) the defendant’s cell phone contained incriminating evidence; (2) the defendant’s cell phone’s data shows that the cell phone was present at the crime scene when the crime occurred, and (3) the fingerprint check-in scanner demonstrated that the defendant was present at the crime scene when the crime was alleged to have occurred. After a thorough cross-examination of the prosecutor’s witnesses, the jury saw fit to deliberate for a full hour(!) before rendering a verdict. The client received ten actual days in jail despite being originally charged with a crime that carried up to 90 days in jail. At the sentencing hearing, the client admitted to having done the crime. In the second of the three jurisdictions, the client’s case was resolved in the form of him not getting actual jail time for three voyeurism charges—which could have resulted him in getting up to 270 days in jail. In essence, for the two cases I saw to completion for this client, the client could have been subjected to a total of up to 360 days in jail, but he got ten days in jail. This amounts to a jail sentence that was only 2.8 percent of what it could have been! According to court websites, this client is now on his third lawyer for his final case. Some people fail to understand when great lawyering occurs. I give myself a five star rating for the representation of this client, which is best demonstrated by the outcome of the cases I saw to completion.