Charlie Naegle | Mesa Criminal Lawyer

The Naegle Law Firm provides aggressive representation for those charged with a criminal offense in Mesa, Chandler, Gilbert, Tempe, Scottsdale, Phoenix and surrounding cities in the state of Arizona. The legal process can be emotionally, physically and financially draining. Mesa criminal defense attorney Charlie Naegle alleviates the burden process puts on the accused and makes a difference in people’s lives, one case at a time.

At most Mesa criminal defense firms, you are treated like a dollar sign, not an individual. But at the Naegle Law Firm, we realize that it is YOUR freedom and YOUR rights on the line. Your case is important to you so it is just as important to us to represent you the way you want to be represented. We pride ourselves on our ability to give each client personalized representation, making the effort to ensure excellence during all phases of your criminal case.

The mission of the Naegle Law Firm is to provide clients with personalized legal representation while advocating aggressively on their behalf. You deserve the best representation and cost should not prevent you from receiving this right. Our rates are extremely competitive and if you cannot afford the full fee, we’ll work with you on a payment plan. We even accept credit cards. You need a criminal defense attorney in Mesa AZ now, and we’ll work with you to make sure that need is met.

Position	Organization	Location	Duration
Managing Partner	The Naegle Law Firm PLC		2010 - Present
Judge Pro Tem	Maricopa County Superior Court		2013 - 2015
Attorney	Maricopa County	Phoenix	2007 - 2010
Law Clerk	Maricopa County		2006 - 2007
Legal Intern	Maricopa County		2004 - 2005

School	Degree	Major	Graduation
Thurgood Marshall School of Law, Texas Southern University	J.D.	Law School	2006
Western International University	B.S.	Business	2003

State / Court	Date
Arizona	2007

• American Academy of Trial Attorneys, Member, 2014 - Present
  The National trial Lawyers, Attorney, 2013 - Present
  National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Member, 2013 - Present
  American Association for Justice, Member, 2012 - Present
  Federal District Court of Arizona, Member, 2010 - Present
  American Bar Association, Attorney, 2007 - Present
  Maricopa County Bar Association, Member, 2007 - Present
  State Bar of Arizona, Attorney Member, 2007 - Present

• Top 100 Trial Lawyers, The National Trial Lawyers, 2014
  Top 40 Under 40        The National Trial Lawyers, 2014
  Top 40 Under 40        The National Trial Lawyers, 2013
  Top 100 Trial Lawyers, The National Trial Lawyers, 2013
  Top 40 Under 40 Trial Attorneys        The National Trial Lawyers, 2012
  SPOT Award, Maricopa County Public Defender's Office, 2008

• State v. J.L Client was charged with disorderly conduct. At trial we argued that the victim did not specifically testify during direct examination that her peace and quiet was disturbed. We strategically chose not to cross examine the victim which precluded the prosecutor from asking any questions on redirect. We argued for a Rule 20 summary judgment and the judge agreed and dismissed the case at the close of the State’s evidence resulting in a full acquittal. State v. M.L. Client was charged with underage DUI which would have resulted in a 2 year license suspension if she was convicted. We argued to the prosecutor that we believed there was an illegal stop by the officer. Result: the charge was reduced to a minor consumption charge in lieu of arguing the motion to suppress. Client’s license was saved. Sate v. D.J. The Defendant was charged with two cases both involving interference with a judicial order of protection on two separate occasions. Counsel made argument that the state could not prove that the defendant made the alleged phone calls due to the fact that the victim did not answer the phone calls. Result: Case Dismissed. State v. J.R. The Defendant was charged with DUI. Counsel argued that defendant was not impaired to the slightest degree from the amount of alcohol in his system. Result: Case Dismissed State v. J.B. Criminal Speeding on the highway. Case reduced to civil fine. State v. P.F. The Defendant was charged with Domestic Violence Assault. Counsel argued no reasonable likelihood of conviction based upon witness issues. Result: Case Dismissed State v. P.F. The Defendant was charged with Assault on a coworker. Counsel argued no reasonable likelihood of conviction based upon mutual combat. Result: Case Dismissed State v. V.S. The Defendant was charged with DUI. Counsel argued that defendant was not impaired to the slightest degree from the amount of alcohol in her system. Result: Reduced to Reckless Driving State V. Mr. P Client was charged with Assault and Disorderly Conduct. Argued self defense and the client was found Not Guilty on both counts after trial. State V. J.C. Client was charged with two counts of DUI: 1. Being in actual physical control of a vehicle while under the influence of a drug while impaired to the slightest degree. 2. Being in actual physical control of a vehicle while there is any drug or its metabolite in the person’s body. The second charge was dismissed by defense motion prior to trial and after a two day jury trial the client was found not guilty on the remaining charge. State V. Mr. F.P. 5 Counts Aggravated Assault – Dangerous 4 Counts Threat to Initmidate – Dangerous Street Gang 3 Counts Endangerment – Dangerous Discharge of Firearm at Structure Jury Trial, Not Guilty on All Counts State V. Mr. M. Aggravated DUI F4 Dismissed State V. Ms. F. Assault – Domestic Violence Dismissed day of trial State V. Mr. S. Criminal Damage M1 Disorderly Conduct Dangerous F6 Pre-Indictment Dismissal State V. Mr. G. 3 Counts of Endangerment F6 Dangerous Discharging a Firearm at a residential Structure F2 Dangerous Participating in a Criminal Street Gang F3 Dangerous Drive by Shooting F2 Dangerous. Prior to our representation the plea offer was 10 years. We fought and got client Probation with no additional jail term. State V. Mr. H. Burglary F4. Client had 3 prior felony convictions original plea was for prison. We fought and got case reduced to a Misdemeanor with no jail term. State V. Mr. P. Aggravated Assault F6, Resist Arrest F6 Jury Trial, Not Guilty on all Counts State V. Mr. R. Misconduct Involving Weapons F4 Jury Trial, Not Guilty State V. Mr. B. Unlawful Flight From Law Enforcement F5 Jury Trial, Not Guilty State V. Mr. R. Aggravated Assault on a Police Officer F6 Dismissed State V. Ms. S. Aggravated Taking the Identity of Another Pre-Indictment Dismissal State V. Mr. S. Transportation of Marijuana F2, Possession of Marijuana for Sale F2 Dismissed by court after argument was made that the police had no reasonable suspicion to stop his vehicle. State V. Mr. A. Aggravated Assault on a Police Officer F3 Pre-Indictment Dismissal State V. Mr. W. Kidnapping F2, Attempted Sexual Assault F3 Jury Trial, Not Guilty on all Charges State V. Mr. B. Possession of Dangerous Drugs F4 (5 prior felony convictions) Prior to hiring the Naegle Law Firm, Mr. B. was offered mandatory prison as a plea agreement. After we were hired the result was supervised probation without a jail term. State V. Ms. PS Ms. PS was charged with littering. Argued the officer never picked up the item allegedly thrown out of the vehicle. Case was dismissed prior to trial. State V. Mr. JN Possession of Narcotic Drugs Argued the pills that were found in his possession by police were actually prescribed to the clients ailing mother and the client was the sole caretaker of his mother. Case dismissed. State V. Mr. MB Assault as a domestic violence offense. Showed the prosecutor there was no way that a fist punch could have caused a perfectly straight cut on the victim. Also proved the victim had a history of threatening bodily harm to herself with a knife. It was shown that within an hour after client was arrested, police were called due to victim threatening herself with a knife again. Case dismissed.

• Naegle Law Firm Blog, What happens if I violate my probation?, 2013
  The Naegle Law Firm Blog, Resisting Arrest in Arizona, 2013
  Article City, The Right To Remain Silent, 2013

Sun.	Mon.	Tue.	Wed.	Thu.	Fri.	Sat.
Closed	8:00 am - 6:00 pm	8:00 am - 6:00 pm	8:00 am - 6:00 pm	8:00 am - 6:00 pm	8:00 am - 6:00 pm	Closed

 Saturday by appointment only

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Google +
• Yelp
• Client Testimonials
• Recent Success
• Practice Areas
• Hire / Contact
• Blog
• For more information about Charlie Naegle