State v. Kim- (October 2023) Mr. Kim was charged with drug trafficking and was facing up to nine years in prison. Once again, Erlinda applied her diligent trial skills during a week-long trial which resulted in a NOT GUILTY verdict.
United States v. O. Moreno- (2019) Mr. Moreno was charged in federal court with Conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and distribution of methamphetamine. He was facing a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years and a sentencing guidelines sentence of more than 14 years. Erlinda aggressively represented Mr. Moreno in a week-long trial which resulted in NOT GUILTY verdicts.
United States v. J. Anaya- (2019) Mr. Anaya was charged in federal court with firearms offenses. He was facing a minimum mandatory sentence of 15 years. Erlinda applied her diligent trial skills during a week-long trial which resulted in a NOT GUILTY verdict.
United States v. K. Thompson– (2020-21) Mr. Thompson was charged in federal court with Hobbs Act Robbery and firearms offenses. He was facing a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years. After a week-long trial in federal court, in the middle of the pandemic, Erlinda zealously advocated for her client, resulting in NOT GUILTY verdicts across the board.
This marked the fourth trial in a row, in a span of 24 months, that resulted in ACQUITTALS for Erlinda’s clients.
State v. G. Leong– (2016-17) Mr. Leong was initially charged with over 300 felony counts of forgery and fraud. Erlinda represented him during the first trial which resulted in a hung jury. After the second trial, Mr. Leong was found Not Guilty of all but 4 low level felony offenses. After successfully appealing to the Court of Appeals, two of the counts of conviction were thrown out and after Mr. Leong was re-sentenced on the remaining two counts, his case was eventually dismissed.
State v. D. Duran– (2015) Erlinda represented a former New Mexico Secretary of State who was facing over 60 counts of embezzlement, fraud and campaign violations. After carefully assessing the evidence, identifying potential legal issues with the manner in which the state gathered its evidence, Erlinda was able to negotiate a resolution whereby the state agreed that Ms. Duran would not face a sentence of imprisonment. While the Court rejected that part of the agreement, Ms. Duran only ended up serving 30 days in jail.
State v. Lopez- (2021) Mr. Lopez was facing a First-Degree Murder case. After filing motions to litigate the legality of certain evidence and the strength of the States’ case, all charges against Mr. Lopez were dismissed.
United States v. A. Romero. Mr. Romero was charged in federal court with distribution of cocaine base and was facing a significant sentence. After a thorough defense investigation in partnership with H.R. Legal Consultants, Ms. Johnson and H.R. Legal Consultants discovered irregularities with the investigation which resulted in violations of Mr. Romero’s Constitutional rights. The Law Office of Erlinda O. Johnson was then able to take that information to the prosecutor and persuade the federal government to dismiss all charges against Mr. Romero. After a five month thorough defense deconstruction of the government’s case, all charges were dismissed.
United States v. G. Montenegro. Mr. Montenegro was charged in federal court with possession with the intent to distribute heroin and methamphetamine and faced more than 15 years in federal prison. After a thorough investigation in partnership with H.R. Legal Consultants, Ms. Johnson demonstrated there were serious problems with the government’s investigation. After challenging the government’s case, Ms. Johnson was able to secure dismissal of all charges against Mr. Montenegro.
United States v. A. Aispuro-Haros. Mr. Aispuro was charged in federal court with possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine and faced over 10 years in federal prison. After extensive litigation and challenge of the government’s case, Ms. Johnson persuaded the federal court to suppress all evidence against Mr. Aispuro. Ms. Johnson was then able to secure dismissal of all charges against Mr. Aispuro.
United States v. J. Herrera. Mr. Herrera was charged in federal court with possession with intent to distribute cocaine and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. He was facing a sentence of between 19-24 years. After an exhaustive analysis and investigation of the evidence against Mr. Herrera, Ms. Johnson discovered numerous irregularities in the investigation. Ms. Johnson was then able to persuade the government to reduce Mr. Herrera’s sentence to just over 3 years.
United States v. A. Greenier. Mr. Greenier was charged in federal court with distribution of heroin. When Ms. Johnson took over Mr. Greenier’s case, he had pled to a federal drug offense with an agreed upon sentence of 10 years. After Ms. Johnson took over the case and worked diligently in partnership with H.R. Legal Consultants, numerous problems with the government’s investigation were discovered and Ms. Johnson was able to successfully persuade the government to agree to a reduction in sentence to 5 years.
United States v. L. Miera. Mr. Miera was charged in federal court with possession with intent to distribute cocaine. He was facing a minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years to life. Ms. Johnson diligently investigated the facts giving rise to the charges. She identified numerous issues which allowed her to present persuasive arguments in support of a lower sentence. Ms. Johnson was able to secure a sentence for Mr. Miera of just over 3 years.
United States v. Jovel involved the seizure of over 60 kilograms of cocaine and the arrest of Mr. Jovel for transporting the drugs. Mr. Jovel was facing a sentence of between 14-17 years in federal prison. Attorney Erlinda O. Johnson aggressively litigated pre-trial motions and eventually proceeded to trial in federal court in New Mexico. Using her methodical and aggressive litigation style, Ms. Johnson was able to persuade the jury to acquit Mr. Jovel. Within a little over one hour of deliberation, the jury returned a not guilty verdict.
United States v. Mendoza-Renteria. In this case, Mr. Mendoza-Renteria was charged in federal court in New Mexico with attempting to possess with the intent to distribute over 7 kilograms of cocaine. He faced a sentence of between 10-12 years in federal prison. After preparing and presenting an aggressive defense, at trial, Ms. Johnson was able to successfully persuade a jury to acquit Mr. Mendoza-Renteria. The jury found Mr. Mendoza not guilty of attempting to possess with the intent to distribute more than 5 kilograms of cocaine and guilty of the federal misdemeanor of simple possession of cocaine. Mr. Mendoza-Renteria’s sentence was 365 days.
United States v. J. Griego. Ms. Griego was charged, in federal court, with possessing with the intent to distribute over 2 ounces of methamphetamine. She faced an enhanced sentence of 10 years. After litigating several pre-trial motions, Ms. Johnson prepared the case for trial. After several days of trial and challenging the government’s case, Ms. Johnson was able to persuade a federal jury that Ms. Griego was guilty of only the misdemeanor of simple possession of narcotics. The jury returned a guilty verdict for only simple possession. Ms. Griego’s exposure in prison went from 10 years to 1 year. She was released from jail after only 1 year.
United States v. D. Aguilar. Mr. Aguilar was charged in federal court with possession with the intent to distribute 2 kilograms of cocaine and possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking offense. He was facing a 10 years sentence. After thoroughly and aggressively challenging the government’s case, Ms. Johnson was able to persuade a jury to acquit Mr. Aguilar. After deliberating for only 45 minutes a federal jury returned not guilty verdicts.
United States v. H. Chavez et. al. involved four defendants charged in a complex drug conspiracy case, in federal court. The defendants were facing sentences of 10 years to life in federal prison. The case involved wiretap evidence. Ms. Johnson meticulously and thoroughly examined the government’s wiretap applications. In partnership with H.R. Legal Consultants, the defense was able to demonstrate serious problems with the government’s evidence. After months of thorough preparation by Ms. Johnson and her expert as well as corroboration of the shortcomings of the prosecution’s case, the government agreed to dismiss all charges against all of the defendants.
United States v. P. Chavez. Mr. Chavez was charged in federal court with conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute over 50 grams of methamphetamine and use of a telephone to facilitate a drug trafficking crime. Mr. Chavez was facing a minimum of 20 years in federal prison. Ms. Johnson methodically and thoroughly analyzed the government’s evidence. After preparing a list of issues with the government’s evidence, Ms. Johnson was able to secure a plea where Mr. Chavez’s sentence would be 2 years, instead of the 20 years he was originally facing.
United States v. J. Hicks. Ms. Hicks was charged, in federal court, with assault resulting in great bodily harm. She was facing a substantial amount of time in federal prison. After preparing for trial and a thorough investigation, the government agreed to dismiss all charges against Ms. Hicks.
United States v. K. Hasson. Mr. Hasson was charged, in federal court, with continuing criminal enterprise and conspiracy to distribute narcotics. Mr. Hasson was facing a minimum mandatory sentence of 20 years. From the moment, Mr. Hasson retained the Law Office of Erlinda Ocampo Johnson, Ms. Johnson began to investigate the charges against Mr. Hasson. After a thorough review, preparation and deconstruction of the government’s case, Ms. Johnson engaged in intense negotiations with the government. Ms. Johnson was eventually able to secure a dismissal of the indictment and a resolution which resulted in a plea to a lesser charge and a sentence of 2 years.
United States v. M. Chandler. Mr. Chandler was charged, in federal court, with conspiracy to evade taxes and evasion of taxes. The case was complex and extensive. After months of thorough review and pre-trial litigation, The Law Office of Erlinda Ocampo Johnson was able to secure a resolution which resulted in a sentence of probation for Mr. Chandler.
United States v. F. Garcia-Vera. Mr. Garcia-Vera was charged, in federal court, with conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute a large quantity if narcotics and possession with the intent to distribute narcotics. Mr. Garcia-Vera was facing between 12-14 years in federal prison. After extensive pre-trial litigation, thorough investigation in partnership with a drug law enforcement expert, Ms. Johnson was able to secure the dismissal of the indictment, a resolution to a lesser charge and a sentence of 25 months.
United States v. J. Andujo. Mr. Andujo was charged in federal court with transporting illegal aliens. While it was a difficult case, the Law Office of Erlinda Johnson worked relentlessly, litigating pre-trial motions and following up on and investigating issues which eventually led to the dismissal of all charges against Mr. Andujo.
United States v. A. Tafoya. Mr. Tafoya was charged in federal court with felon in possession of a firearm. Mr. Tafoya was facing a sentence of between 4-5 years in federal prison. After one trial which resulted in a mistrial and extensive litigation and preparation for a second trial, Ms. Johnson was able to secure a resolution for Mr. Tafoya which resulted in a plea to a lesser charge and a sentence of probation.
United States v. C. McGaughy. Mr. McGaughy was charged in federal court with conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute a substantial amount of marijuana. He was facing a substantial prison sentence. After extensive pre-trial litigation and investigation, the charges against Mr. McGaughy were dismissed.
United States v. E. Mantilla. Mrs. Mantilla’s case resulted from a long-term investigation which involved wiretaps by the Drug Enforcement Administration. The federal charges involved allegations of importation and distribution of large quantities of marijuana. Mrs. Mantilla was charged in federal court with conspiracy to distribute drugs. She faced a substantial prison sentence as well as deportation from the United States. The Law Office of Erlinda O. Johnson immediately undertook the task of analyzing the wiretap affidavits and applications. After extensive and careful review of the evidence in the case, Ms. Johnson was able to secure a dismissal of the charges against Mrs. Mantilla and a resolution of a plea to a lesser charge, with a sentence of probation and no deportation.
United States v. A. Cruz. Mr. Cruz was charged, in federal court, with conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute over 20 kilograms of cocaine. He was facing over 14 years in federal prison and deportation. After extensive investigation, research and pre-trial litigation, The Law Office of Erlinda O. Johnson was able to resolve the case with a dismissal of the indictment, a plea to a lesser charge, with a 21 month sentence and no deportation.
United States v. L. Villa. Mr. Villa was charged in federal court with possession with intent to distribute over 7 kilograms of cocaine. His case involved the government’s use of a wiretap of Mr. Villa’s phone. Mr. Villa was facing a 20 year sentence. Ms. Johnson meticulously and thoroughly examined the government’s wiretap applications and the pre-wire investigation. In partnership with H.R. Legal Consultants, the defense was able to demonstrate serious problems with the government’s evidence. After months of thorough preparation by Ms. Johnson and her expert as well as corroboration of the shortcomings of the prosecution’s case, the government agreed to dismiss of the indictment and a plea to a lesser charge, with a sentence of 29 months.
In the Matter of J. Jacquez. Mr. Jacquez was placed in removal proceeding as a result of a prior record. The case involved complex legal issues. After extensive research and litigation, Ms. Johnson was able to successfully persuade a federal immigration judge in El Paso, Texas that Mr. Jacquez’s offenses were not deportable offenses and therefore, Mr. Jacquez was eligible for a waiver of deportation. Ms. Johnson was able to secure a waiver of removal, release from custody and the privilege to remain in the United States as a lawful permanent resident for Mr. Jacquez.
In the Matter E. Holguin. Mr. Holguin was placed in removal proceedings as a result of a criminal conviction. After extensive preparation and litigation, Ms. Johnson was able to successfully persuade a federal immigration judge in El Paso, Texas to grant Mr. Holguin a waiver of removal. After months of litigation, Mr. Holguin won his freedom and the privilege to remain in the United States as a lawful permanent resident.
In re. M. Enayat. After having lived in the United States from the time he was a child, Mr. Enayat was placed in removal proceedings in a federal immigration court in Boston, Massachusetts. He was facing permanent banishment from the United States. Ms. Johnson aggressively defended Mr. Enayat. After months of litigation and a complex trial which involved the testimony of an expert on Iranian culture, religion and country conditions, Ms. Johnson persuaded a federal immigration judge in Boston, Massachusetts to grant Mr. Enayat deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. The Court found that if Mr. Enayat were removed from the United States, he would face torture in Iran.
