Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire Philadelphia criminal defense lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire, recently won a new trial for a client who served 18 years for a wrongful conviction for attempted murder. In 2006, the client, R.C., was arrested and charged along with three others for participating in shooting at an alleged rival from the neighborhood. The shots missed and struck a young child, seriously injuring him. R.C. and his co-defendants were charged with various counts of attempted murder and firearms offenses. The entire case depended on the testimony of on ..read more

Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The Pennsylvania Superior Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Coles, reversing the trial court’s grant of a motion to suppress a gun. The Court found that the trial court should have found that police properly searched the defendant’s bag after the defendant fled from a lawful police stop, ran into someone else’s house without permission, and abandoned the bag containing the illegal gun. The Facts of Coles Two Philadelphia police officers were on patrol in September 2020. They observed the defendant and other individuals ..read more

Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Berry, overturning a long line of Superior Court precedent and holding that a sentencing court may not consider a defendant’s bare record of arrests at sentencing without any evidence of the underlying criminal conduct. Previously, a sentencing court could consider the defendant’s arrest record even where the arrests did not result in convictions so long as the sentencing court recognized the difference between an arrest and a conviction. The Supreme Court has now rejected ..read more

Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Yard, finding that a defendant does not have the right to bail in a first-degree murder case no matter how weak the case. The Facts of Yard In Yard, the defendant was charged with first-degree murder after the August 2021 death of his infant son. The child suffered fatal blunt-force trauma while under the defendant’s care. Adding to the suspicion, the child also had broken ribs from weeks prior to his death. In April 2022, Yard was formally charged with multiple offenses, i ..read more

Commonwealth v. Camacho Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently decided the case of Commonwealth v. Camacho, reversing the trial court’s order denying the defendant's motion to suppress an illegal gun which was found in his car during a warrantless search of the car. The case illustrates the strict requirements police must follow in order to conduct a warrantless search of a car in Pennsylvania following the Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Alexander. The Facts of Camacho On October 9, 2020, Pennsylvania State Police T ..read more

Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire Philadelphia criminal defense attorney Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire, recently won a sentencing appeal for a client in the case of Commonwealth v. S.G. In S.G., the defendant was convicted at trial in the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas of corrupt organizations, conspiracy to commit corrupt organizations, washing vehicle titles, and related charges for an alleged car title washing scheme. The trial court sentenced him to consecutive sentences on the corrupt organizations and conspiracy to commit corrupt organizations charges. S ..read more

Commonwealth v. Peters Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The Pennsylvania Superior Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Kevin Peters, holding that the trial court properly convicted the defendant of third degree murder for killing two people while driving drunk. The holding in this case conflicts with numerous cases of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in which the Court has held that drunk driving normally does not show the malice necessary to sustain a third degree murder conviction. Nonetheless, an en banc panel of the Superior Court affirmed the defendan ..read more

Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has just decided the case of United States v. Moore, holding that the Second Amendment does not provide an individual with the right to possess a firearm while on federal supervised release. Although recent federal case law has expanded some of the protections provided by the Second Amendment, the federal courts have now begun to walk that case law back and re-impose limits which historically appeared to be settled. The Facts of Moore Moore had previous federal convictions for distributi ..read more

Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The Pennsylvania Superior Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Carter, holding that the trial court properly excluded evidence that the defendant shot someone else who was potentially involved in the murder with which he was charged. The Superior Court found that the trial court properly excluded the evidence because although it was relevant, its admission would have been too unfairly prejudicial to the defendant. At the same time, the Superior Court held that the trial court erred in precluding evidence that the defendan ..read more

Philadelphia Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Raheem Stevenson, holding that a defendant may still appeal a trial court’s pre-trial ruling on the admissibility of a prior conviction even if the defendant preemptively introduces the harmful evidence during direct examination. The Facts of Stevenson The defendant and his co-defendant were arrested for an alleged armed robbery that took place in 2017. During trial, the Commonwealth moved in limine to introduce evidence that the defendant had a prior 2005 conv ..read more