Danville Criminal Lawyer, Pennsylvania

Sponsored Law Firm

x
Click For More Info:

Mark Guralnick
About | Practice Areas
Law Office of Mark S. Guralnick
55 Madison Avenue 4th Floor Morristown, NJ 07960Â» view map
Criminal Defense Law
Dedicated. Fearless. Successful.

Mark S. Guralnick and his legal team have helped clients throughout the USA and across the world by applying unparalleled dedication and hard work to each case.

800-399-8371
1. Mark Guralnick Morristown, NJ
  Attorney at Law - NJ, 1984
  Shepard Broad Law Center J.D.1984
2. AboutLaw Office of Mark S. Guralnick
  Our firm assists clients in a wide variety of legal challenges.
3. Practice AreasExpertise
  Criminal
1. Contact
2. Email
3. Refer
4. Blog
5. Visit:
6. Website
7. Profile

John A. Mihalik

Criminal, Construction, Child Custody

Status: In Good Standing

CONTACT

3 East 5th Street, Bloomsburg, PA 17815

George O. Wagner

Government, Criminal

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 54 Years

CONTACT

212 Mill Street, Danville, PA 17821

Angela L. Mattis

Government, Estate, Divorce & Family Law, Criminal

Status: In Good Standing

CONTACT

253 Mill St, Danville, PA 17821

Hope Renee' King

Criminal

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 35 Years

CONTACT

121 E Market St, Danville, PA 17821

Hope R. King

Criminal

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 33 Years

CONTACT

121 E Market St, Danville, PA 17821

Laurie Lynn Pickle

Motor Vehicle, Divorce, Criminal, Bankruptcy

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 20 Years

CONTACT

334 Railroad St, Danville, PA 17821

Hank James Clarke

Estate Planning, Criminal

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 16 Years

CONTACT

603 West Main Street, Bloomsburg, PA 17815

Christine Marie Luschas

Divorce, Child Custody, Criminal, Personal Injury

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 13 Years

CONTACT

120 West Main Street, Bloomsburg, PA 17815

Noah Gerald Naparsteck

Divorce, Child Custody, Misdemeanor, Personal Injury

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 26 Years

CONTACT

120 West Main Street, Bloomsburg, PA 17815

Richard W. Knecht

Real Estate, Estate, Divorce & Family Law, Criminal

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 40 Years

CONTACT

35 West Main Street, Bloomsburg, PA 17815

800-923-0641

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

LEGAL TERMS

DIRECTED VERDICT

A ruling by a judge, typically made after the plaintiff has presented all of her evidence but before the defendant puts on his case, that awards judgment to the... (more...)

A ruling by a judge, typically made after the plaintiff has presented all of her evidence but before the defendant puts on his case, that awards judgment to the defendant. A directed verdict is usually made because the judge concludes the plaintiff has failed to offer the minimum amount of evidence to prove her case even if there were no opposition. In other words, the judge is saying that, as a matter of law, no reasonable jury could decide in the plaintiff's favor. In a criminal case, a directed verdict is a judgement of acquittal for the defendant.

CORPUS DELECTI

Latin for the 'body of the crime.' Used to describe physical evidence, such as the corpse of a murder victim or the charred frame of a torched building.

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT

The burden of proof that the prosecution must carry in a criminal trial to obtain a guilty verdict. Reasonable doubt is sometimes explained as being convinced '... (more...)

The burden of proof that the prosecution must carry in a criminal trial to obtain a guilty verdict. Reasonable doubt is sometimes explained as being convinced 'to a moral certainty.' The jury must be convinced that the defendant committed each element of the crime before returning a guilty verdict.

MOTION IN LIMINE

A request submitted to the court before trial in an attempt to exclude evidence from the proceedings. A motion in limine is usually made by a party when simply ... (more...)

A request submitted to the court before trial in an attempt to exclude evidence from the proceedings. A motion in limine is usually made by a party when simply the mention of the evidence would prejudice the jury against that party, even if the judge later instructed the jury to disregard the evidence. For example, if a defendant in a criminal trial were questioned and confessed to the crime without having been read his Miranda rights, his lawyer would file a motion in limine to keep evidence of the confession out of the trial.

WARRANT

See search warrant or arrest warrant.

JURY

Criminal Law Traffic TicketshomeGLOSSARY jury A group of people selected to apply the law, as stated by the judge, to the facts of a case and render a decision,... (more...)

Criminal Law Traffic TicketshomeGLOSSARY jury A group of people selected to apply the law, as stated by the judge, to the facts of a case and render a decision, called the verdict. Traditionally, an American jury was made up of 12 people who had to arrive at a unanimous decision. But today, in many states, juries in civil cases may be composed of as few as six members and non-unanimous verdicts may be permitted. (Most states still require 12-person, unanimous verdicts for criminal trials.) Tracing its history back over 1,000 years, the jury system was brought to England by William the Conqueror in 1066. The philosophy behind the jury system is that--especially in a criminal case--an accused's guilt or innocence should be judged by a group of people from her community ('a jury of her peers'). Recently, some courts have been experimenting with increasing the traditionally rather passive role of the jury by encouraging jurors to take notes and ask questions.

MCNAGHTEN RULE

The earliest and most common test for criminal insanity, in which a criminal defendant is judged legally insane only if he could not distinguish right from wron... (more...)

The earliest and most common test for criminal insanity, in which a criminal defendant is judged legally insane only if he could not distinguish right from wrong at the time he committed the crime. For example, a delusional psychotic who believed that his assaultive acts were in response to the will of God would not be criminally responsible for his acts.

OWN RECOGNIZANCE (OR)

A way the defendant can get out of jail, without paying bail, by promising to appear in court when next required to be there. Sometimes called 'personal recogni... (more...)

A way the defendant can get out of jail, without paying bail, by promising to appear in court when next required to be there. Sometimes called 'personal recognizance.' Only those with strong ties to the community, such as a steady job, local family and no history of failing to appear in court, are good candidates for 'OR' release. If the charge is very serious, however, OR may not be an option.

MISTRIAL

A trial that ends prematurely and without a judgment, due either to a mistake that jeopardizes a party's right to a fair trial or to a jury that can't agree on ... (more...)

A trial that ends prematurely and without a judgment, due either to a mistake that jeopardizes a party's right to a fair trial or to a jury that can't agree on a verdict (a hung jury) If a judge declares a mistrial in a civil case, he or she will direct that the case be set for a new trial at a future date. Mistrials in criminal cases can result in a retrial, a plea bargain or a dismissal of the charges.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

Reinhart v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.

... The Department suspended Licensee's operating privileges because of three criminal convictions arising from a single accident: reckless driving; failing to stop his vehicle at an accident scene where 168 death or personal injury was involved; and driving under the influence of ...

Com. v. Abraham

... 3 Abraham was charged with corruption of a minor, 18 Pa.CS Â§ 6301; indecent assault of a person less than 16 years of age, 18 Pa.CS Â§ 3126; endangering the welfare of a child, 18 Pa.CS Â§ 4304; and criminal solicitation, 18 Pa.CS Â§ 5902. ...

Com. v. Baldwin

... According to the Commonwealth, Section 9765 clearly indicates the legislature's intent that criminal defendants' sentences do not merge unless all of the elements of one offense are included within the elements of the other offense. ...

SORT BY:

FILTER BY:

Free Consultation
Male
Female
Suspended

Danville Criminal Lawyer, Pennsylvania

Sponsored Law Firm

Law Office of Mark S. Guralnick

SPONSORED LAWYERS

John A. Mihalik

George O. Wagner

Angela L. Mattis

Hope Renee' King

Hope R. King

Laurie Lynn Pickle

Hank James Clarke

Christine Marie Luschas

Noah Gerald Naparsteck

Richard W. Knecht

TIPS

LEGAL TERMS

DIRECTED VERDICT

CORPUS DELECTI

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT

MOTION IN LIMINE

WARRANT

JURY

MCNAGHTEN RULE

OWN RECOGNIZANCE (OR)

MISTRIAL

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

Reinhart v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.

Com. v. Abraham

Com. v. Baldwin

SORT BY:

FILTER BY:

PRACTICE AREAS 30

NEARBY CITY SUGGESTIONS

Lawyer.com Legal Protection Plan

Premium Membership

Additional Services

Resources

My Account Details