Skip to main content
David L. Freidberg

David Freidberg’s Legal Cases

62 total

  • 12-235088

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Outcome:
    Not Guilty
    Description:
    Client was charged with two counts of battery. This absolutely should have been charged as a felony aggravated battery due to the use of a weapon and the nature of the injuries, great bodily harm. The allegations were that my client slashed each victims neck, resulting in a 4 inch permanent gash. Case was set for trial, both victims appeared and testified, and it was more than evident that there was in fact a 4 inch large scar on each victim's neck. The problem is that each victim had conflicting testimony at trial, neither actually saw my client with a weapon, both were intoxicated at 5:00am when they came out of the bar, AND one of the victims actually started the altercation with my client by attempting to punch him in the face! When he pushed her away, and she fell, she got up and instead of retaliating against my client, she decided to punch his girlfriend, who was already on the ground! Motion for directed finding granted, not guilty!
  • 12-227974

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Mar 27, 2013
    Outcome:
    Case Dismissed
    Description:
    Client was charged with theft at Midway Airport. Allegedly he picked up an iPad at security and walked off with it to his gate. The State's Attorney had a video and two TSA Agents in court when we set the case for trial. The victim, who had always appeared in court ready to proceed, failed to appear. The State asked for a continuance which was summarily denied by the judge when we answered ready for trial. Case dismissed!
  • 12246039

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Apr 03, 2013
    Outcome:
    Not Guilty
    Description:
    Perfect result as expected. My client was charged with two counts of battery for allegedly putting his hands on two security guards at Soldier Field during a Bears game. The two guards "claim" my client grabbed them and shoved them, for no apparent reason. What actually happened is that he was calling out to them to see if they could help located his friend. When they didn't respond, he placed his hand on one of the guards shoulder to get his attention. The guards took offense to this and grabbed him, cuffed him, and turned him over to the Chicago Police Department on trumped up charges of battery. At trial I argued that there was no touching of an insulting or provocative nature and thus no battery actually occurred. The trial judge agreed and found my client NOT GUILTY on both charges.
  • 11 CR 1917

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Nov 20, 2013
    Outcome:
    NOT GUILTY
    Description:
    My 22 year old client, with no criminal background, was charged with Armed Robbery and Aggravated Battery. This case carried a mandatory 21 year sentence if convicted because there was an allegation that a firearm was used during the offense. My client was charged along with another co-defendant after they allegedly robbed a pizza delivery guy. Even though my client did not possess the weapon, because he was “involved” the state’s attorney was attempting to use the law of accountability to charge him with the same crime as the co-defendant. The law of accountability states that a defendant must engage in a common criminal design or agreement, any acts in furtherance of that common design committed by one party are considered to be the acts of all parties. And I tell all of my clients, even if I believe they have a difficult case, you never know what will happen when an officer or civilian victim testifies. In this case, the officers sworn report stated that my client actually took possession of the pizzas, after his co-defendant held a gun to the victim’s head, and ran into a neighboring house. There were also allegations that not only was a gun held to the victim’s head, but that three other masked individuals were involved who attacked the victim, causing bodily harm. At trial the victim made no mention of my client possessing a firearm or taking possession of the pizzas. A motion was made after the state’s attorneys rested their case for a directed finding of not guilty. The judge heard arguments from both sides and determined that my client could not be found guilty and found my client NOT GUILTY! And my scared client did not even have to testify.
  • 12 CR 1360

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Dec 02, 2013
    Outcome:
    NOT GUILTY
    Description:
    My client was charged under 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6 with four counts of Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapon with no valid FOID card. The first two counts were dismissed by the State’s Attorney due to my filing of a Motion to Dismiss under People of the State of Illinois v. Aguilar. My client is a duly licensed security guard who was pulled over at midnight on Christmas Eve for a broken tail light. He voluntarily told the ISP (Illinois State Police) trooper that he had his gun on him, that he is a security guard and showed him his FOID card. Trooper ran the card and found it revoked. It was revoked due to his previous Agg UUW arrest. I did a bench on that one and got a not guilty as well. His FOID was returned to him at the conclusion of his first trial. The issue I presented at trial is NOT whether his FOID card was revoked, but whether he had knowledge. The client testified that never received any notice of the revocation. State argued strict liability, but I effectively argued that the word "knowingly" under the statute modifies the entire statute, not just the portion relating to possessing a firearm. The judge agreed that it modifies the entire statute and found him not guilty.
  • 12 CR 1391

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Dec 05, 2013
    Outcome:
    NOT GUILTY
    Description:
    Another NOT GUILTY on a charge of Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapon by a Felon! After almost 2 years, my Agg UUW Felon case went to trial today in Bridgeview and surprisingly, everyone answered ready. This was a case where the co-defendant was alleged to have fired off a couple rounds on New Year's Eve and my client was alleged to have made an oral statement admitting to the gun that was found in his bedroom closet. We were forced to go to trial as the alternative was 3-7 IDOC time. Judge was fantastic and was eloquent enough to say that you don't need to call someone a liar for them to not be necessarily believable. I truly thought my client was going to be a guest of IDOC for quite a few years. NOT GUILTY for both co-defendants.
  • 13 OP 74540

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Feb 03, 2014
    Outcome:
    Order of Protection Dismissed!
    Description:
    I represented the Respondent in defense of a Petition for an Order of Protection The basic facts are that she dated the Petitioner for over a year, they planned to marry and for whatever reason, the wedding was cancelled by the Petitioner. Then things fell apart disastrously. Emails and texts were sent, police reports were filed, my client was arrested on more than one occasion as a result of the Petitioner’s false accusations. She actually ended up with a misdemeanor criminal trespass to property! That case went to trial and she was found not guilty. I cannot tell you how much work went into this case. My client was incensed with how she was treated by the Petitioner and how much strife he caused in her life. And truthfully, it was almost impossible for me to represent her as she was very emotional and demanding (understandably) with what she expected of my legal services. I had to explain that it was a somewhat simple matter of defending the allegations in the Petition and that it wasn’t necessary to bring up other seemingly irrelevant issues that weren’t related to those specific allegations. The key is, I tell every client, criminal or civil: be calm in court, do not make any gestures, do not make any comments unless you are being questioned, and just stand there next to me and look at the judge. People and some attorneys don’t understand that a judge is actually watching everything that goes on in her courtroom. She notices how you dress, how you compose yourself and what you say. I’ve lost trials based on how my client comports herself in court. My client at her hearing performed exceptionally. She didn’t do anything to offend the court and remained calm and fairly impassive. On the other hand, opposing counsel started yelling at her when she didn’t answer a question the way he wanted her to. The judge lit into him like I’ve never seen. At the end of the day, the judge found the Petitioner to be wholly unbelievable in his allegations and my client now has a clean record. Justice prevailed. See more at: http://www.chicagocriminallawyerblog.com/2014/02/07/order-protection-dismissed/
  • 13-230372

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Feb 11, 2014
    Outcome:
    NOT GUILTY
    Description:
    Client was charged with battery. Allegedly he pushed the victim twice in the chest. Turns out, the "victim" video'd the entire incident on his phone. I explained the situation to the State's Attorney and that they should dismiss the case based on lack of evidence. They declined. We went to trial today where the judge viewed the video not once, but twice. On my motion for directed finding, he laid into the State and the victim stating that (a) there was no indication that a battery occurred at all and (b) that it actually appeared as if the victim was attempting to provoke my client into hitting him. Not guilty!
  • 14 DV 70055

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Mar 14, 2014
    Outcome:
    NOT GUILTY
    Description:
    In this matter, my client was charged with domestic battery against his "landlord". He leased the basement area from a woman who owned the home. She decided to come into his living space without knocking or announcing herself while my client was visiting with his sister. Upon requesting that she leave immediately, the landlord refused and started a verbal altercation. In response, my client put his arm out to prevent her from entering into the area further. She then became combative and proceeded to hit my client twice. In order to restrain her from continuing to hit him, my client then grabbed her by the arms and removed her from the area and shut his door. She then called the police claiming he grabbed her and left bruises. The State offered to dismiss the charge and instead have him agree to an Order of Protection. I advised against this as an Order of Protection would result in a mark on his criminal background, and my client's background was clear, other than this arrest. We proceeded to trial and the judge found his story more believable than the victim's and he was found not guilty. Needless to say, another very happy client.
  • 13-221786

    Practice Area:
    Criminal defense
    Date:
    Mar 20, 2014
    Outcome:
    NOT GUILTY
    Description:
    62 year old election judge was charged with battery for allegedly grabbing and twisting the hand of a woman who was trying to grab a ballot from him during a union election. The "victim" waited a day to even call the police. Matter was set for trial. Victim called two witnesses on her behalf and we had two on my client's side. Judge quickly determined that no criminal activity occurred and found my client not guilty.