Bugden & Isaacson, L.L.C., represents clients throughout Utah in an array of criminal matters including sex offenses, white collar crimes, drug crimes, and DUI offenses. Our attorneys also handle administrative hearing matters. The following are recent victories by the firm:


CHARGES DECLINED IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS:

We are able to assist clients best when they contact us immediately. If we can get involved before charges are filed, we can make a big difference – hopefully, by persuading the prosecutor to never file charges in the first place. This can mean taking a client in for an interview, having an investigator contact witnesses and generally preparing a defense that convinces a police officer or prosecutor that the case should not be filed. In just the past few years we have been successful in the following cases:

Client was accused of Rape at his university dorm room. The firm was able to persuade the District Attorney’s Office that all contact was consensual and the case was declined, January 2020

Client was accused of Rape at a fraternity party. The firm was able to persuade the District Attorney’s Office that all contact was consensual and the case was declined, March 2020

Client was accused of Rape. After independent private investigation, the firm was able to persuade the detective and prosecutor to not file charges and the case was declined, December 2019 

Juvenile client was accused of Rape at a party. The firm was able to persuade the District Attorney’s Office that all contact was consensual and the case was declined, October 2019

Juvenile client was accused of Rape. After independent private investigation, the firm was able to persuade the detective and prosecutor to not file charges and the case was declined, December 2018 

Two clients were accused of Possession with Intent to Distribute. The firm was able to persuade the prosecutor’s office to not file charges against two women transporting 43 pounds of marijuana in the trunk of their rental car. The firm successfully argued that the 45-minute delay awaiting the arrival of a drug sniffing dog unlawfully extended the detention longer than was necessary for a minor traffic stop.


Sex Offenses:

The firm represented a client charged with Object Rape, Forcible Sex Abuse, Attempted Forcible Sodomy, and Attempted Rape. After conducting an extensive independent investigation and hiring a forensic expert to review an extraction of the alleged victim's phone, the case was dismissed by the prosecutor at the preliminary hearing. 

The firm represented a juvenile accused of Sexual Assault on a date several months after the alleged incident occurred. After independent investigation, the firm was able to persuade the prosecutor to dismiss the case literally one (1) day after receiving the firm’s letter with supporting documents and photographs.

The firm represented a client charged with Possession of Child Pornography. After retaining a forensic expert and filing multiple pretrial motions, the firm was able to persuade a judge that the prosecutor could not prove the client’s possession of the pornographic images. All charges were dismissed.

The firm represented a client charged with Object Rape, Forcible Sodomy & Forcible Sexual Abuse. The case was dismissed as a result of the firm's ability to obtain records contradicting the alleged victim's statements along with the filing of multiple pretrial motions regarding evidence in the case. 

The firm represented a client charged with Object Rape, a first degree felony. After independent investigation, the firm was able to negotiate a deal allowing the client to plead no contest to one count of Sexual Battery, a class A misdemeanor with probation and no jail.

The firm represented a client charged with 4 counts of Object Rape and 1 count of Forcible Sex Abuse. The client was accused by two women who met the client at a bar and going home with them of drugging and sexually assaulting them while they were allegedly asleep. The firm was able to obtain a complete dismissal of the charges. 

The firm represented a client charged with two counts of Sex Abuse of a Child. The firm retained multiple experts and was able to persuade a jury that the client was not guilty of all charges.  

The firm represented a client charged with five counts of Sodomy of a Child and Aggravated Sex Abuse of a Child. The client was accused of sexually inappropriate contact with his biological daughter. After extensive investigation and preparation, the client was found not guilty of all charges at trial.

The firm represented a defendant accused of sexual abuse by a niece. At a preliminary hearing, evidence was presented by the defense of the accuser’s behavior on Facebook and other websites to demonstrate that the accuser was not a credible witness. All charges were dismissed against the defendant after the preliminary hearing. The firm subsequently represented the client in a lawsuit against DCFS. The findings by the agency were successfully set aside.

The firm represented a client accused of Rape involving allegations by an estranged spouse. All charges were dismissed against their client after extensive pretrial motions were argued about the motives and bias of the complaining witness.


DUI VICTORIES: 

After retaining expert witnesses to testify that his client's Oxycontin level was within prescribed therapeutic level and the State Forensic Lab’s reference range for impairment was incorrect, the firm was able to persuade the prosecutor to amend the case from Driving Under the Influence (DUI) to Careless Driving and a Stop Sign violation.  This was particularly helpful to the client who frequently traveled to Canada for business. A DUI or the reduced charge of Impaired Driving would have rendered the client unable to enter Canada.

The firm represented a client charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) after being followed by an officer when leaving a bar. The firm was able to persuade the prosecutor that the case should not have been filed based upon the defendant’s performance on field sobriety tests and the case was dismissed. The firm was also able to get the client’s license suspension reversed upon appeal.

The firm represented a client for a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) where the client faced a 36-month suspension due to a prior offense and refusing the breathalyzer. The firm successfully argued that there was insufficient evidence to arrest the client, despite a citizen witness who claimed that the client was driving erratically. The firm demonstrated that the arresting officer did not perform the field sobriety tests according to national standards.

The firm represented a client charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) after a single car rollover on the freeway. The firm persuaded the driver’s license division and the judge in the criminal case that the driver’s performance on the field sobriety test did not establish probable cause to believe that the driver was impaired and that the arrest was therefore unlawful. The .12 Intoxilyzer test result was thrown out, the case dismissed, and the client kept his driver’s license.

The firm obtained a complete dismissal of a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) involving a refusal and a blood test of .09 after the officer obtained a warrant. The firm persuaded the drivers’ license division not to revoke the client’s license for 18 months. The firm then persuaded a Judge to suppress the evidence after the Judge concluded that there was insufficient evidence for probable cause. The case also involved issues related to the client’s diabetic condition. No action was taken against the drivers’ license and the DUI was dismissed completely.

The firm won a driver’s license division hearing for a client charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) after the driver was stopped for making a wide turn and speeding. Although the officer testified that the driver did not do well on the field sobriety tests, the cross examination showed the officer did not follow protocol for administering sobriety tests. The firm also got the officer to admit that he failed to examine the driver’s mouth before administering the intoxilyzer test. The driver kept her license.

The firm won a driver’s license hearing and got a DUI charge dismissed when a driver was stopped at a roadblock. The driver failed field sobriety tests and tested positive for the presence of marijuana in her blood. But the firm persuaded the chief of the police department that a mistake had been made in the chain of custody of the driver’s blood sample and the case was dismissed.

The firm won a driver’s license hearing for a driver stopped for speeding 96 mph on the freeway. The driver failed all of field sobriety tests and blew a .181 on the intoxilyzer. The firm persuaded the administrative review panel that the driver was illegally arrested because the driver told the trooper before the field sobriety test, that he had suffered a torn ACL and needed surgery. The administrative review panel agreed that the tests were not reliable indicators of impairment because of the injury.

The firm convinced a judge that a client charged with Driving Under the Influence (DUI) after pulling from the private parking lot onto a street did not violate any traffic laws by failing to signal upon entering the roadway. The judge agreed that the stop was illegal. The .179 breath test was thrown out, and the case was dismissed.

The firm represented a client charged with DUI and open container. The firm won an acquittal on both counts. The client blew a .179 on the intoxilyzer. Three police officers, a civilian witness, and a trooper with the Utah Highway Patrol all testified against the client. The firm was able to persuade the jury that the breath test results were not reliable and that her client did not possess an open container.


DRUG CASES:

The firm represented a client charged with Conspiracy to Distribute Synthetic Cannabinoids, Possession with Intent to Distribute, and Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering in United States District Court. Client plead to one count of Entry of Goods by Means of False Statements. The judge ordered the client to pay a fine with no jail.

The firm represented a client charged with Possession of Heroin and Methamphetamine with Intent to Distribute in United States District Court. A plea deal was negotiated to one count Possession with Intent to Distribute. The judge ordered probation and no jail.

The firm represented a client charged with Conspiracy to Distribute Methamphetamine in United States District Court. The firm was able to persuade the prosecutor and judge to agree with place the client on probation with no jail. 

The firm represented a client charged with Possession of Marijuana. The firm persuaded the prosecutor that the arresting officer exceeded the proper scope of a pat down search when she removed an item from the client’s pocked that the officer admittedly knew was not a weapon. All charges were dismissed.

Homicide cases:

The firm represented a client charged with two counts of Accessory After the Fact to Murder in the United States District Court. The firm was able to negotiate a plea deal allowing the client to plead to once count of Making False Statements. The Judge placed the client on 3 years of probation with credit for time served.

The firm represented a client accused of being an accomplice in a stabbing murder. As a result of immediately interviewing witnesses to the stabbing, the firm was able to persuade the prosecutor that the defendant was a witness to the murder, but not an accomplice to the homicide. Client was charged with Obstruction of Justice and Assault; but never convicted of murder.

Domestic Violence cases:

Client was arrested for Domestic Violence against his wife. After independent investigation, the firm was able to persuade the prosecutor to dismiss all charges.

The firm represented a client who was falsely accused by his wife of Domestic Violence. She claimed two instances of abuse and provided photographs of bruises to the police. At a bench trial, the judge dismissed all charges against the defendant upon the firm’s motion at the end of the City’s case. A bruise expert was retained to refute the photographic evidence. The wife also filed false protective order violation charges against the defendant. The firm was able to get those charges dismissed as well.

White Collar cases:

The firm represented a client charged with eight counts of Conspiracy to Commit Wire & Bank Fraud and Aggravated Identity Theft in United States District Court. A negotiation was reached for the client to plead to one count of Aggravated Identity Theft. The judge ordered credit for time served - 18 months. 

The firm represented a client accused of Health Care Fraud in federal court. After extensive litigation, the firm persuaded a federal judge to dismiss all charges against the client due to the failure of the Government to preserve and turn over computer and electronic evidence that would have shown the client was not guilty of the crimes alleged.  

The firm represented a client convicted of five counts of Wire Fraud with over one million dollars loss to multiple victims / investors. The firm convinced the judge to impose a 27-month sentence rather than 46-month sentence urged by the Government.

The firm successfully persuaded a federal judge to terminate supervised probation on a white-collar defendant who still owed a significant amount of restitution. The Judge rejected the prosecution’s opposition and found the termination to be in the interests of justice.

The firm represented a client investigated by the FBI for submitting false billings to a national corporation for logistics services.  No charges were filed after client gave an extensive interview to the prosecutor and FBI agent.


Administrative Matters:

The firm represented a husband and wife after the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) entered Findings of Failure to Protect against the clients for injuries to their infant child.  DCFS argued intentional injury from Shaken Baby Syndrome.  Findings were found to be unsupported at trial.

The firm represented a husband and wife after the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) entered Findings of Severe Physical Abuse and Sibling at Risk against the clients for injuries to their infant children.  DCFS argued injuries resulted from intentional child abuse by one or both parents. The Court found insufficient evidence to attribute infliction of injury to either parent. 

The firm represented a physician charged with Possession of Child Pornography. As a result of the charge, the Department of Professional Licensing (DOPL) took his medical license. The firm successfully defended the criminal case where all charges were dismissed. The firm also persuaded DOPL to reinstate his medical license. 

To learn more about our services or to speak with an experienced trial attorney, call Bugden & Isaacson, L.L.C. today at (801) 467-1700.

Contact Us

Please fill out the form below and one of our attorneys will contact you.

!
!
!

Office Location

  • Salt Lake City Office

    Address

    445 East 200 South
    Suite 150
    Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

Choose a location to review

Bugden & Isaacson, LLC locations:

Reviews & Ratings

  • 5.0/5.0

    Because of the high quality service and professionalism, I continue to refer Tara and the team. They also continue to provide me and others with true professionals in other areas of practice. Hands down the best.

    — Client

  • 5.0/5.0

    Exceptional outcome... I was referred to Tara when I ran into some legal issues. Tara and her team were able to work with the county prosecutors office. They kept me informed through the whole process. They were honest with the outcome righ...
    Show More

    — Client

  • 5.0/5.0

    Retaining Tara as my defense attorney was the best decision I could have made. Tara could not have been more helpful during an incredibly hard time with the added stressors of Covid-19. She was responsive and transparent, keeping me thoroug...
    Show More

    — Client

  • 5.0/5.0

    Retaining Tara as my defense attorney was the best decision I could have made. Tara could not have been more helpful during an incredibly hard time with the added stressors of Covid-19. She was responsive and transparent, keeping me thoroug...
    Show More

    — Client

  • 5.0/5.0

    I hired Tara and upon our first meeting, the ball was rolling. They contacted the City Prosecutor (where the charges were filed) and were able to work out a deal quickly and to our satisfaction. Documents were all correct and filed promptly...
    Show More

    — Client