Attorney Daniel Keith Peugh's Legal Cases

Criminal defense

State vs. Clint M., CR-2017-06263-B

Jan 09, 2018

OUTCOME: Motion to Suppress granted, case dismissed. The initial detention of my client was illegal. All evidence collected after the detention was suppressed. That left no evidence to use against my client.

Client was driving on a dark gravel road in a rural part of Denton County. It was between 3 a.m .and 4 a.m. and my client had temporarily pulled off the road to do something he couldn't do while drivi ... ng. A Sheriff's Deputy saw my client's truck stopped at the side of the road and saw it pull back onto the road to continue travel. Upon seeing a car approaching behind him and having not accelerated much from his previous stop, my client pulled to the side of the road again to let the vehicle pass. Instead of passing, the Deputy activated the lights on the squad and detained my client. While interacting with my client the Deputy suspects my client of DWI. My client is put through the usual questions and the usual tests and, ultimately, arrested and charged with DWI. In Court we filed a Motion to Suppress Illegally Seized Evidence based on the Deputy's initial detention of my client. The Deputy wrote in his report that he detained my client to, "check his welfare." We didn't like that justification so, we challenged it.

Criminal defense

State of Texas vs. Chilton Brown

Nov 06, 2009

OUTCOME: A felony charge was declined for prosecution.

My client was accused of felony Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle. Foolishly, my client spoke to the investigating officer from the Denton Police Department before hiring me. He believed he could tell th ... e Investigator his side of the story and the investigator would take his statement seriously. After the Investigator called my client a liar, my client realized he needed someone on his side. The Investigator clearly was not listening to anyone but the alleged victim, who happened to be lying. Rather, than doing a real investigation the Detective repeated every claim made by the alleged victim in his investigation report and ignored, as lies, everything my client had told him. Why? This approach was quicker and easier than a real investigation. The case that the detective made was sent to the Denton County Criminal District Attorney's Office for prosecution. This is where I became involved. I worked with my client to clarify his version of events. Further, as I do in every case, I constructed a defense with my client that included tangible evidence supporting my client's version of events. A person can be called a liar from the police investigation right through a jury trial. However, receipts, surveilance video, photos, business records, and eye witness accounts cannot be accused of lying. Since the Detective had already called my client a liar, this phase of the representation was even more critical than usual. The District Attorney's Grand Jury Lawyer was presented with my client's version of events and the tangible evidence supporting his version. In addition, I added my analysis of the alleged victim's story and her obvious motives to lie (insurance proceeds). The Denton County Criminal District Attorney's Office to their credit saw the obvious problems with the alleged victims claims that the Detective refused to even look at. It took about a month but, I obtained written confirmation from the District Attorney's Office that my client would NOT be indicted on the charges.

Daniel Keith Peugh's Legal Cases (2)

State vs. Clint M., CR-2017-06263-B

State of Texas vs. Chilton Brown