Jacob Cristoforo | Kawkawlin Criminal Defense Lawyer

• Member | Michigan State Bar Association

In November of last year, a case was referred to me on a charge of possession of marijuana. At the time, the client had a bench warrant issued for failing to appear for court, and the warrant was pending for nearly 6 months. The client had a valid MMMA card, but there was a lapse in registration (likely due to irregularities with LARA), so that the client was not valid at the time he got stopped and arrested. Client originally had appointed counsel, and a plea was offered for 7411 status. However, bond conditions and probationary status would have required client to submit to random drug screening, which likely would have led to violations, jail, and revocation. Once I was retained, I filed a Motion to Modify Bond Conditions to delete the testing requirement, and my Motion was granted. For the case in chief, I knew that immunity under Section 4 of the MMMA wouldn't be successful (due to the lapse in registration), so instead, I filed a Motion to Dismiss under Section 8 of the MMMA. Following an evidentiary hearing on my Section 8 Motion, the charge against my client was dismissed. The client, who had an outstanding bench warrant, a suspended driver's license, and court supervision for drug testing, walked out of court with rights intact and nothing more. It was a good win.

Good work. I don't, and I have never advertised my practice. One thing that I learned from the firm that I used to clerk for is, that, many firms pour funds into advertising, but the client is simply paying for the quality of the advertisement. My view is, that clients should pay for the quality of their representation instead. Most, if not all, of my referrals come from former clients that have been able to assess my effectiveness firsthand, not on a billboard.

Clients definitely need to demand honesty in seeking legal representation. It is all too often that clients would like to employ a "yes man" to represent them, but unfortunately, that's not reality in many cases. An attorney that guarantees a particular result before the conclusion of a case is most likely: dishonest, uninformed, or has committed malpractice. Point is: take the (honest) bad news along with the good news.

Local knowledge is important, but it should not be the defining aspect in hiring counsel of your choice. For example: in some cases, local knowledge might inform an attorney of how a particular judge might rule; however, in other cases, local knowledge might create a situation where an attorney could just "go with the flow," instead of making appropriate challenges.

In a free phone consultation, I WILL advise my clients of their applicable legal rights, and inform them of the potential procedures that might be involved in their case. I WILL NOT provide a conclusive legal opinion regarding the merits of a case until I have the opportunity to investigate and fact-check.

In a free phone consultation, I require: Name, address, phone number, email address (or indication that email should not be used), opposing party, nature of the case, which court the matter is pending in, and agreement for compensation.

What differentiates me from other lawyers in my community is: work ethic, and brutal honesty. I will not fluff a potential result for a client just to be hired on a case. But, I will fight tooth and nail where a meritorious claim exists.

The most rewarding aspect of my job is helping people that are in need. We all have to share this place, and in most instances, everyone is served best by implementing a plan that works for everyone. Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen. . . and that's where I involve myself. I'll fight for the ""little guy"". When I win, that is the most rewarding aspect.

I play hockey as a goaltender, I play the drums in a local band, I love my dogs (Cooper and Tommy), and I'm deeply in love with my girlfriend, Meagan Eager.