Case Results

Defendant was charged in the 399th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas, with choking his brother-in-law during a domestic disturbance in his home. His brother, sister and mother all testified against him. During trial, Donald H. Flanary, III., was able to show the jury that he acted in self-defense. Mr. Flanary was put his client on the stand and was able to tell his side of the story. The jury believed the defense and, very quickly, returned a verdict of not guilty.

Defendant was facing a 10-year mandatory minimum prison sentence. Defendant was charged in federal court in the Southern District of Texas, Laredo Division, with Count One: Coercion and Enticement of a Minor (18 USC Section 2422(b)); and Count Two: Transfer of obscene material to a minor (18 USC Section 1470). Donald H. Flanary, III. and his associate, Amanda I. Hernandez, were able not only to secure a NOT GUILTY verdict for their client but also showed the jury that the government agent in the case unlawfully entrapped the defendant.

Defendant was charged with assaulting his wife, causing bodily injury in the County Court at Law No. 7 of Bexar County, Texas. Donald H. Flanary, III., advocated for his client’s rights and showed the jury that the offense did not occur did the way law enforcement said it did. The jury found the defendant not guilty at trial.

Defendant came to Flanary Law Firm, PLLC, after losing a trial for attempted sexual assault in the 441st Judicial District Court of Midland County, Texas, and was going to be deported for the offense. After an investigation, the Flanary Law Firm, PLLC, found that constitutional violations had occurred in the defendant’s trial that negatively impacted him and led to an unfair trial. After winning a Motion for a New Trial with the judge, Donald H. Flanary, III., and his associate, Amanda I. Hernandez, took the defendant’s case back to trial and were able to show the jury that the attempted assault had never been committed, but rather was an attempt to hurt the defendant by the complainant. Defendant was acquitted of the felony charge and was able to lawfully stay in the United States.

Defendant was charged with entering a home without permission from the property owner, a second-degree felony. During the trial, Donald H. Flanary, III., was able to effectively tell the client’s story and explain why he should be found not guilty of the offense charged. Defendant was acquitted by the jury at trial.

Defendant was charged with deadly conduct in the County Court at Law No. 6 of Bexar County, Texas. Donald H. Flanary, III., assisted in the trial and helped attack the state’s investigation of the case. The defendant was acquitted at trial.

Defendant in this case was charged with DWI with a blood-alcohol concentration of .15 or higher in the County Court at Law No. 11 of Bexar County, Texas. Donald H. Flanary, III., and his associate, Amanda I. Hernandez, were able to show the jury that the defendant’s actions on the police video were at odds with the alleged blood-alcohol concentration. Don Flanary was able to challenge the science behind the testing and showed his expertise in DWI law to the jury. The jury was able to see that there was a disconnect between the alleged BAC and the video evidence and found the defendant not guilty at trial.

Defendant was charged in the 226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas, with 5 counts of felony sexual assault. Don Flanary was lead counsel and was able to effectively explain to the jury that the defendant’s encounter with the alleged victim was completely consensual and that there was more to the story and the complainant was telling. After a week-long jury trial, the Defendant was acquitted of all charges.

Defendant was charged in the 186th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas, with the felony offense of engaging in sexual contact with a child under the age of 17 by contact. Donald H. Flanary, III. was lead counsel and his associate, Amanda I. Hernandez, was second chair. Throughout the trial, Don and Amanda were able to show that the State failed to do a thorough investigation of the matter and pointed out continuous errors and omissions by law enforcement. The offense was alleged to have been committed at a party at the defendant’s home, yet no witnesses were ever interviewed by the government. After a 5-day trial, the jury was able to understand the defendant’s story and he was found NOT GUILTY of offense charged.