Aaron Nathaniel Holt

Amazing Job, Mr. Holt was extremely knowledgeable, reasonable, confident, and honest. He and his legal assistant Madison, are second to NONE. We walked into a nightmare (self inflicted) and some how Mr. Holts & his legal team had me walk away from a Probation Violation with DISMISSAL Of All charges... including Probation. His manners, professionalism, and integrity put him far beyond great as a lawyer for me. i would hands down Recommend Mr. Holt over any legal representation I’ve ever used!! Thank you again..

Aaron Holt is a negligent attorney who is getting away with presenting my case, in poor preparation and investigation. I say this for several Reasons,  I was rushed out of his office cause he had business to attend to, so I was never offered to ",sign the agreement." Paid $3000 to Barb his secretary... during that time informed me I would be emailed a copy of the agreement. 1. I asked counsel to withdraw his omnibus pretrial motion that did not relate to the actions that took place August 9th, 2020@1700 hr.  I asked if he got the discovery video's. He told me, its to late, that he electronically sent it in to the Adams County Court pacfile, on February 17th, 2020 as we spoke over the phone.  He mentioned through email ", watching the video for the first time this pass Wednesday March 25,2020," that's when I realized he did not investigate or request discovery of video evidence until March 25,2020 exactly 38 days after he filed his omnibus pretrial motion on February 17th, 2020. 2. Instructed counsel at separate time's to : * restructure the omnibus pretrial motion and also, what later became the brief that he wrote referencing title 75 Pa Vehicle Code. Section 3301 in its full capacity and not 3331 as ordered by Honorable Judge Shawn Wagner. In April , he later added only the Pa Vehicle code section 3331 without a defense that created a downhill battle." * Our initial meeting, I asked him to review video evidence which led to the events that took place on August 9th, 2020 @ 1700 hour, in which is exactly 0ver 200 days into the case, this means Pa Model Penal Code 1.06 has been violated as of the March 29, hearing. * I'm sure you knew that there are time limits to amend ? here are some time limits set forth in the current version of Section 1.06 of the " Pennsylvania Model Penal Code,” which are similar to those of many states: D. petty misdemeanors and infractions: six months. See Pa Model Penal Codes Section 106.1 (1) A prosecution for murder may be commenced at any time. (2) Except as otherwise provided in this Section, prosecutions for other offenses are subject to the following periods of limitation: (d) a prosecution for a petty misdemeanor or a violation must be commenced within six months after it is committed. There are two main categories into which crimes can be separated. The less severe is known as a misdemeanor. Within these main categories, there also exist sub-categories. A petty misdemeanor is the least severe category in its class, but it is more serious than what is called an infraction. The artificial man is here with numerous petty misdemeanor charges for traffic violations, and what misdemeanor follows from an investigation, which directly relates to section 3309 of the pa vehicle codes. It's also punishable with a fine. If you are caught driving over the speed limit, you will be charged with a petty misdemeanor offense. Occasionally, charges like these can be disputed.  Other violations can include reckless driving. If you are confused about your petty misdemeanor for a traffic violation, it is a good idea to fully research your circumstances like I did. The District Attorney had only six months to amend a traffic violation, which he did request illegally or in violation of the Pennsylvania  Model Penal Code PART I.  GENERAL PROVISIONS, and counsel made no mention of the District Attorney's violation of section 1.06 Pa. Model Penal Code. Irreconcilable differences mentioned must be either: 1. There is a conflict that cannot be resolved 2. Nonpayment, These are common differences used for irreconcilable differences. It is a word used to deliberately obscure the nature of the problem so as to not violate any confidences. In this present matter, you did not afford your client due diligence. You not only allowed the DA to amend a petty misdemeanor charge beyond a lawfully litigated rule that assures due process, but you also failed to provide due diligence.