We have handled over 5000 cases in the last 12 years.
Here are just a few examples of the results we’ve obtained…

Drug Charges Case Results

Probation & Gun Charge Dismissed

  • Charges: (F) Possession Firearm by Felon; Possession with Intent to Sell/Deliver Marijuana; Possession with Intent to Sell/Deliver Cocaine
  • Facing: 83-112 months on the Gun charge alone if indicted as a Habitual Felon
  • Result: Probation; Gun charge dismissed
  • North Carolina v. R.B.: Our client was arrested in a small county in Eastern North Carolina after police raided a residence with a search warrant and located large amounts of marijuana, cocaine, and a firearm. At the time our client retained our office to represent him, he had previously received a plea offer to plead guilty to the Possession of Firearm by Felon charge, under which he would have received a lengthy active prison sentence. After conducting a thorough review of the evidence and pointing out flaws in the State’s case, we secured the dismissal of the Firearm by Felon charge and secured probation with no active time.
  • Attorney: KMM

Probation

  • Charges: Habitual Felon (N.C.G.S. § 14-7.1); Trafficking in Methamphetamine (N.C.G.S. § 90-95(H)(3B) (two counts); Manufacture of Methamphetamine (N.C.G.S. § 90-95(B)(1A)); Possession of Drug Paraphernalia (N.C.G.S. § 90-113.22(A)); Maintaining a Motor Vehicle/Dwelling Place for Keeping or Selling a Controlled Substance (N.C.G.S. § 90-108(a)(7)); Felony Probation Violation (N.C.G.S. § 15A-1345)
  • Facing: 624 – 791 months plus revocation of probation
  • Result: Probation
  • State v. S.C.: Client was charged along with 2 other codefendants in the manufacturing and trafficking of methamphetamine. After law enforcement found a “clandestine laboratory” in the codefendant’s vehicle, a search warrant was executed at our client’s home. Law enforcement located cleaning supplies and alleged that the cleaning supplies were “methamphetamine precursors.” Our client was facing mandatory prison time, if convicted. The Assistant District Attorney indicted our client as a “habitual felon,” due to his prior criminal history, exposing our client to even more active jail time if convicted. Further complicating matters, Defendant was already on probation at the time of the offense and, if convicted, he was facing the activation of his probation sentence. We placed the case on a trial calendar and demanded to inspect the evidence seized from our client’s home. After inspecting evidence and identifying weaknesses in the state’s case, we were able to persuade the Assistant District Attorney to dismiss four of our client’s charges and stipulate to a full probationary sentence on the remaining offense. We further persuaded the judge to strike our client’s probation supervision fees for the duration of his probationary sentence.
  • Attorney: MJM

All Charges Dismissed

  • Charges: (2 Counts) Trafficking 28 Grams or More of Heroin, N.C. Gen. Stat. 90-95(h)(4); Sale or Delivery of a Schedule I Controlled Substance, N.C. Gen. Stat. 90-95(a)(1)
  • Facing: Mandatory Minimum Sentence of approximately 19 Years on each Level III Heroin Trafficking charge
  • Result: All Charges Dismissed
  • North Carolina v. M.R.: Our client was arrested and charged with the most serious drug trafficking charges that exist under North Carolina law – multiple counts of Level III Heroin Trafficking – after she was apprehended at Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU) with what police and federal agents described as 582 grams of heroin (over 1 pound). After gaining access to a key lab report that showed the substance seized by law enforcement from our client was not actually heroin – or any other controlled substance – all charges against our cl

Probation

  • Charges: Trafficking in Marijuana by Transport; Trafficking in Marijuana by Possession (N.C.G.S. § 90-95(h)(1)) ; Manufacturing Marijuana (N.C.G.S. § 90-95(b)(2)); Maintaining a Motor Vehicle for Keeping or Selling a Controlled Substance (N.C.G.S. § 90-108(a)(7))
  • Facing: 62 – 112 months (with a mandatory minimum of 25-39 months)
  • Result: Probation
  • State v. V.E.: Defendant was stopped in his car for a Window Tint Violation and Driving While License Revoked. The officer searched Defendant’s car based on alleged odor of marijuana, after detaining him from a questionable period of time. After questioning the validity of the officer’s actions during the stop and offering some general character information about our client, we were able to persuade the Assistant District Attorney to allow our client to enter a plea to
    Attempted Trafficking. This allowed our firm to argue for and win a probationary sentence on behalf of our client.
  • Attorney: MJM

Plea to Misdemeanor Possession of Drug Paraphernalia

  • Charges: Felony Possession of Cocaine, N.C.G.S. § 90-95; Felony Possession with Intent to Sell & Deliver Marijuana, N.C.G.S. § 90-95; Felony Possession of Marijuana, N.C.G.S. § 90-95
  • Facing: 24 months – 57 months
  • Result: Plea to Misdemeanor Possession of Drug Paraphernalia; Complete substance abuse assessment
  • State v. B.F.: Our client was approached by law enforcement while standing outside his vehicle in the parking lot of his place of employment. During questioning, he confessed to using marijuana and having marijuana in his vehicle. Upon consenting to a search of his vehicle, law enforcement found cocaine in the center console. Our client had a lengthy criminal record and was facing an active prison term if convicted. After our client retained our firm, we challenged the legality of our client’s detainment in the parking lot. Upon reviewing our legal arguments, the Assistant District Attorney offered our client a misdemeanor plea to Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. Sentencing was in the discretion of the court. At the sentencing hearing, we successfully assisted our client in avoiding active prison time and supervised probation. Our client only had to pay small fine and complete a substance abuse assessment.
  • Attorney: MJM

Probation

  • Charges: Possession of Cocaine, N.C.G.S. § 90-95; Assault on a Female, N.C.G.S. § 14-33(c)(2); Unauthorized Use of Motor Vehicle, N.C.G.S. § 14-72.2
  • Facing: 19 months – 41 months
  • Result: Probation
  • State v. A.S.: Our client was stopped by law enforcement for illegally parking his girlfriend’s car. As part of the investigation, his girlfriend was interviewed and bruises were discovered on her arms and chest. She accused our client of assault her. After placing him under arrest, officers found cocaine in our client’s pocket. Once our client was charged, the Assistant District Attorney discovered a prior record of assaults and wanted to bring additional charges against our client for Felony Habitual Misdemeanor Assault. However, we were able to assist our client and his girlfriend with obtaining couples counseling and our client underwent a voluntary substance abuse assessment. Using this information, we were able to persuade the State to dismiss the Assault charge, rather than add another felony to the charges. The felony drug charge was reduced to a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge. Our client’s prior record made him eligible for an active jail sentence, even for a misdemeanor offense. However, we were able to incorporate in his plea arrangement that he receive a probationary sentence.
  • Attorney: MJM

Charges: Felony Possession with Intent to Sell Cocaine, (M) Possession of Marijuana, and (M) Possession of Drug Paraphernalia (N.C.G.S. § 90-95)

Facing: 8-19 Months in Prison

Result: Misdemeanor plea with Unsupervised Probation

North Carolina vs. N.K. – Our client was involved in a narcotics buy-bust by officers with the Hertford County Sheriff’s Department, who located approximately 21 grams of crack cocaine as well as more than one ounce of marijuana in our client’s vehicle. After making a strong argument to the district attorney that our client’s constitutional rights were violated through the use of uncorroborated tip from an informant resulting in an illegal search, all felony charges against our client were dismissed. He pled guilty to a minor misdemeanor and was sentenced to unsupervised probation, allowing him to return to his job and family in another state.

Attorney: KMM

Charges: Felony Possession of Cocaine (N.C.G.S. 90-95)

Facing: 6-17 Months in Prison

Result: Dismissed without Deferral or Diversion Program

North Carolina vs. A.S. – Our client was one of several individuals in a vehicle stopped by law enforcement for a minor traffic infraction. The vehicle stop was quickly transformed into a full scale drug investigation when, prior to the car stopping in response to the officer’s blue lights, one of the individuals in the car threw an unknown object out the window. Police later found a small baggie containing cocaine, and all of the occupants of the vehicle were charged with Felony Possession of Cocaine. After presenting compelling evidence of innocence to the prosecutor, including the client’s passed drug test within hours of the arrest, all charges were dismissed.

Attorney: KMM

Charges: Trafficking Opium or Heroin; Maintaining a Dwelling for Keeping a Controlled Substance; Simple Possession of a Schedule III Controlled Substance

Facing: 225-282 months

Result: Deferred prosecution for dismissal

State v. M.T. – Client’s home was searched, pursuant to a warrant, and over 28 grams worth of oxycodone pills were found in her bedroom. Client admitted to law enforcement that the pills belonged to her. We filed a Motion to Suppress the results of the search warrant based on lack of probable cause. We presented our motion to the Assistant District Attorney, along with documentation of our client’s background, ongoing education, and work history. We also presented drug screens from our client after the date of the arrest, demonstrating our client’s reformed behavior. We were able to persuade the District Attorney to reduce the charges to Felony Possession of a Schedule II Controlled Substance. We went even further and persuaded the sentencing judge to allow our client to enroll in a drug deferral program, whereby our client will secure a dismissal of all charges in one year.

Attorney: MJM

A Review of Marcilliat & Mills PLLC

Patrick’s law group was awesome when I was being investigated by the police for allegations made by one of my children. His team was able to present our side of the story and show that these things did not happen as was being alleged. Because of his actions the police decided to not pursue charges. I would hire them again in a heartbeat.

Review by: a client
Reviewing: Criminal Defense Legal Services
Date published: 01/26/2016
Rating: 5 / 5 stars

Disclaimer: The listed cases are illustrative of the types of cases handled and do not represent the entire record of cases handled by the firm. The outcome of a particular case is based upon a variety of factors and cannot be predicated upon a lawyer’s or law firm’s past results. The penalties listed for each case are the maximum amount of time the client was facing, based upon the structured sentencing guidelines and taking into consideration each client’s criminal record at that time. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

DISMISSALS

State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape

read more

Not Guilty

State v. B.S. – First Degree Murder

read more

Reduced Charges

State v. E.D. – Identity Theft

read more

No Charges Filed

State v. J.A. – First Degree Rape

read more

Each case is different and must be evaluated on its individual facts. We work hard to assess each case individually. Prior results do not guarantee any future outcome.

LET US HELP YOU

Put our team of criminal defense lawyers on your side today. You are one phone call or email away from getting your questions answered by an experienced defense attorney.

Call us at 919-838-6643to set up a free consultation or send us an email.

Fill out the form below for a Free Consultation.

Fields marked with an * are required

I have read the disclaimer.(Required)

Call 919-838-6643 to schedule a free initial consultation. Offices open weekdays 8am – 7pm, Saturdays 9am – 5pm

*AV®, AV Preeminent®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished and Martindale-Hubbell Notable are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell® is the facilitator of a peer review rating process. Ratings reflect the anonymous opinions of members of the bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ fall into two categories — legal ability and general ethical standards.

© 2024 Marcilliat & Mills PLLC. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy |