David Kiehle was a decorated career Marine with no criminal history. He was charged with first degree murder relating to the death of his wife. Mr. Kiehle maintained his innocence and claimed his wife ...committed suicide. Mr. Kiehle was tried and convicted and sentenced to natural life with no possibility of parole. Mr. Kiehle's parents contacted Mr. Gorman and told him the history of the case. Mr. Gorman agreed to take the case. After conducting an investigation Mr. Gorman filed a petition for post‑conviction relief (Rule 32) arguing that Mr. Kiehle was denied a fair trial because of jury misconduct. After several years of post-conviction proceedings an additional appeal and an evidentiary hearing Mr. Keihle's first degree murder conviction and sentence of natural life were reversed and he was granted a new trial. State v. David W. Kiehle, CR 99‑091679.
Constitutional
Right To Counsel, San Francisco, CA 9th Circuit. Mikal Omar Rasul v. Janet Napolitano; Terry L. Stewart, Director ADOC
Jan 01, 2004
OUTCOME: Petition for Issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus Granted
9th Circuit Court of Appeals reverses District Court judge and orders State of Arizona to release Mr. Gorman's client from prison unless it provides him with a second appeal and a lawyer. Mr. Gorman re...ceived a letter from Mikal Rasul, a black Muslim who was incarcerated Arizona Department of Corrections serving a 21 year sentence. Mr. Rasul had already served 7 (seven) years in prison of his 21. 25 year sentence. Mr. Rasual explained that he had been tried and convicted in Pima County Superior Court. Mr. Rasul stated the Pima County Superior Court judge refused to appoint him a conflict free trial lawyer. Mr. Rasul went on to explain that the trial was held without him being present, he was held in the county jail while his trial was conducted. At Mr. Rasul's trial the jury saw an empty table and no defendant. Mr. Rasul had no defense or defense attorney he could trust. Mr. Rasul was brought before the judge for sentencing, still without a lawyer of his choice and sentenced to 21.25 years in prison. Mr. Rasul from prison, requested, as was his right an appointed lawyer to assist him on his an appeal to the Arizona Court of Appeals. The Arizona Court of Appeals refused to provide him with appointed counsel on his appeal. As a consequence he had no appeal since he was incapable of doing it himself.Mr. Gorman agreed to take the case to federal court. Mr. Gorman filed a Petition for the Issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus in United States District Court for the District of Arizona. The District Court Judge denied the Petition. Lawyer Gorman appealed the District Court's denial to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco CA. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with Mr. Gorman and reversed the District Court Judge. The Writ of Habeas Corpus was granted and the State of Arizona was ordered to release Mr. Rasul from the Arizona Department of Corrections unless Mr. Rasul's direct appeal was initiated within 90 days AND the State of Arizona appointed appellate counsel for Mr. Rasul to assist him on his appeal. See Mikal Omar Rasul, Petitioner v. Janet Napolitano; Terry L. Stewart, Director; David Cluff, Respondents, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 2004-15937, D.C. No. CV-01 -001 129-DCB.
Appeals
Off Death Row. State v. Cropper, 206 Ariz. 153 (2003) Arizona Supreme Court
Sep 05, 2003
OUTCOME: Death sentenced reversed by the Arizona Supreme Court
Leroy Cropper was tried, convicted, sentenced to death and awaiting execution on Death Row when Mr. Gorman agreed to take his case. Mr. Gorman argued that Mr. Cropper's 6th Amendment Right to jury sent...encing was violated. The Arizona Supreme Court agreed and reversed Mr. Cropper's sentence of death.
Appeals
1st Degree Murder Conviction Reversed. State v. Hall, 204 Ariz. 442 (2003) Arizona Supreme Court
Mar 15, 2003
OUTCOME: 1st Degree Murder conviction reversed by Arizona Supreme Court Hall granted retrial.
Henry Hall was already on death row awaiting his execution when Mr. Gorman agreed to take his case. Mr. Gorman filed an appeal with the Arizona Supreme Court and argued Hall's 6th Amendment right to a ...fair and impartial jury was violated. Mr. Gorman argued that Hall's murder conviction and sentence of death should be reversed because the jury was tainted by the actions of the trial court's bailiff. The Arizona Supreme Court agreed. Hall's murder conviction was reversed. Hall was granted a retrial.
Criminal defense
The Innocent Immigrant - State v. Arturo Sesma, CR 1996‑009337. Phoenix, AZ
Jan 01, 1998
OUTCOME: 1st Degree Murder charges (2) dismissed with prejudice
Arturo Sesma was the youngest of 6 siblings who had all immigrated to the United States from Mexico. Arturo was married to a U.S. citizen and had an infant child. Arturo was caught in the middle of a s...hoot out in an apartment parking lot between two other individuals. Two people were shot and killed one a 6 year old child. The state mistakenly charged Arturo with multiple counts of 1st degree murder alleging he had acted as an accomplice. Arturo was held in the local jail. Mr. Gorman was contacted by Arturo's entire family (they barely fit in his office). That night Mr. Gorman went to the apartment complex where the shooting occurred with his investigator and knocked on every door until he found a witness who saw what actually happened, a witness who supported Arturo's claim of innocence. Mr. Gorman then secured Arturo's release from the county jail while he awaited his jury trial. After 3 years of investigation and litigation Mr. Gorman and Arturo appeared for the jury trial. Pre‑trial legal pleadings were filed and arguments were made to the judge. The judge agreed with lawyer Gorman and dismissed all counts of 1st degree murder with prejudice. Arturo is presently working and raising his family in Arizona.
Criminal defense
Entrapment - State v. Lawrence S. Heninger, CR 1992‑090608.
Jan 01, 1993
OUTCOME: All charges dismissed.
Entrapment — White Collar Crime —Money Laundering
Lawrence S. Heninger was in his 60s, a card carrying conservative Republican and had never been arrested or accused of any crime. Heninger worked and ...lived in Palm Springs, CA. He was a licensed car, plane and RV dealer. Heninger was contacted by a government operative named Richard Stein. Stein was a career criminal who decided it would be easier to work for the Mesa Police Department and take a percentage of any property seized as part of a law enforcement bust. Stein phoned Heninger and told him he wanted to buy a plane from him and talked him into flying to Mesa, AZ with the plane to complete the transaction. Heninger thought it was a legitimate deal. When Heninger arrived in Mesa, undercover police officer's offered Heninger an inflated sum for the plane to make the offer hard to refuse. Heninger agreed to the offered price. Then immediately before completing the transaction the undercover police said "Oh by the way we are drug dealers" Heninger (on tape it was recorded) attempted to back out of the deal but eventually went through with the transaction. The undercover police than immediately arrested him and threw him in the local jail. Mr. Gorman was retained and conducted an investigation into the sleazy background of Richard Stein and the illegal practices of the Mesa Police Department. Mr. Gorman argued to the trial judge that the case should be dismissed with prejudice because Heninger was entrapped. The judge agreed and dismissed the charge/s with prejudice.
Constitutional
The Dead Man Walking Case. State v. Nic Sizemore State v. Nicholas Sizemore, CR 2001‑0338.
Sep 16, 1992
OUTCOME: Client saved from death sentence
Death Penalty Pre-Trial Proceedings — Mr. Gorman prevents the State from seeking a death sentence by pre-trial tactic. Mr. Gorman agreed to defend 23 year old prison inmate Nicolas Sizemore who was fac...ing a death prosecution. Mr. Sizemore was already serving a 30 year prison sentence when he and two other white supremacists were video taped in the prison yard stabbing to death the leader of the Mexican prison gang. A conviction and death sentence seemed guaranteed in light of Sizemore's criminal record and the evidence. In the pre‑trial proceedings Mr. Gorman employed an unheard of legal tactic that caught the Arizona Attorney Generals Office flat footed resulting in the State being legally barred from seeking the death penalty. It was successfully litigated from Navajo County Superior Court to the Arizona Supreme Court. State v. Nicholas Sizemore, CR 2001‑0338. Also see New York Times September 16, 2002 article on the Sizemore case, "A Supreme Court Ruling Roils Death Penalty Case." The transcript of the proceeding inwhich Mr. Gorman employd the legal tactic that saved Sizemore's life was used in the training materials at the Seventh National Federal Habeas Corpus Seminar in Nashville, TN on August 22-25, 2002
Criminal defense
Not Guilty 1st Degree Murder. State v. Roger Raymond Gonzales, CR 1991‑91184 Maricopa County Superior Court, Phoenix,AZ .
Jan 01, 1992
OUTCOME: Found Not Guilty at Trial of 1st Degree Murder
Death Penalty Trial. Jury finds lawyer Mr. Gorman's client not guilty of capital murder.
Roger Raymond Gonzales was accused of capital murder. The State was seeking a death sentence. Mr. Gorman agreed... to take the case and began an extensive investigation. At trial the State argued Mr. Gonzales committed a contract murder. Mr. Gorman through cross‑examination of the State's witness's demonstrated that each State witness was either unreliable because of drug addiction or had a motive to lie (committed the murder themselves etc). The jury agreed with Mr. Gorman and found Roger Gonzales not guilty of 1st degree murder. State v. Roger Raymond Gonzales, CR 1991‑91184.
Criminal defense
The Bail Rape Case. State v. Edward Steven Maxwell, CR1990‑003331.
Jan 01, 1991
OUTCOME: Not Guilty of All Sexual Assault Charges
Jury finds Mr. Gorman's client not guilty of rape charges.
Edward Maxwell was rumored to be an informant for law enforcement. He was accused of rape by a woman who had put her house up as collateral t...o bail her boyfriend out of jail. Her boyfriend was arrested on a drug bust while out on bail. She believed Maxwell had informed on her boyfriend and believed she would lose her house as a result of the bail forfieture. Gorman argued to the jury that her allegations were false. That her motive to falsely accuse Maxwell of rape was for revenge, his informing on her boyfriend. She thought Maxwell had informed on her boyfriend and her boyfriend's arrest would lead to his bail being revoked and her losing her house. The jury agreed with Attorney Gorman and found Maxwell not guilty of all charges.
Criminal defense
The Carlucci Family Secret. State v. Lou Lovett, CR 1989‑000951.
Jan 01, 1990
OUTCOME: Not Guilty of all Charges
Child Molest — Jury finds lawyer Gorman's client not guilty of all child molest charges.
Lou Lovett had not seen his natural daughter Rebecca for 15 years. He had divorced her mother, left Ohio and mo...ved to Arizona. He was contacted by his ex‑wife who sought to arrange a reunion. After Rebecca visited her father in Arizona she told him she had repeatedly been sexually molested by her step‑father Antonio Carlucci. Lou did not let his daughter return to Ohio until he was assured she would have no contact with her step‑father. He threatened to report his ex‑wife and Carlucci to the Ohio police. His mistake was to let his daughter return to Ohio. Once in the control of her mother Lou was accused and charged with multiple counts of child molestation. He faced hundreds of years in prison. Mr. Gorman took the case and argued to the jury that Rebecca had been molested, it was the "Carlucci family secret" and the motivation for the false accusation against Lou. The jury agreed and found Lou not guilty of all charges.
