Case Results in State and Federal Courts – Dallas Criminal Defense Attorneys

We are proud of our trial victories in both state and federal court and we are equally proud of our appellate victories.

More importantly, we are proud of the results we have achieved for our clients.

Many lawyer websites have a “results page” making it difficult to really sort out true “results.” For example, it shocks us, but many former prosecutors will list numerous “victories” on their “results page,” yet, when you look carefully, they are actually talking about guilty verdicts they obtained as a prosecutor! Many of these lawyers have never heard the words “not guilty” as a defense attorney and there is a world of difference between convicting a defendant as a prosecutor and obtaining an acquittal for a client as a defense attorney.

Also, many law firms, including our firm, list various cases in which they obtained dismissals. Nevertheless, it is often hard to judge if the dismissal came as the result of the skills of the lawyer or for some reason the lawyer had nothing to do with (for example, the complaining witness could not be located).

In comparing results, the best thing to look for is actual “not guilty” verdicts that the lawyers obtained after a trial or in appeal cases in which convictions were reversed or where significant sentences were reversed. It is these type of results that really speak to a lawyer’s skill in the courtroom. For example, despite the fact that approximately 90%-95% of defendants who go to trial in federal court are convicted, only 35% of Clint. Broden’s federal trials resulted in final convictions for the client.

The bottom line is that not all “results pages” are alike and it important to know what to look for when you are selecting a criminal defense attorney who will have your liberty in his hands. We are trial lawyers and, unlike many lawyers, our results page is not full of our “plea bargain” successes. We prefer to highlight our trials and not guilty verdicts.

Results in Federal Cases

We challenge you to find a criminal defense firm in the State of Texas with more “not guilty verdicts in federal trials than Broden & Mickelsen. Moreover, in one of our cases, we became one of the very few firms in the country to force the government to pay for the client’s legal fees. We like to think our results speak for themselves

Federal Fraud Trials

Former Texas Instruments employee was charged with stealing trade secrets for the benefit of a Chinese company in a multi-count indictment in federal court in Dallas. While some attorneys believe clients should not testify or put them on the stand with little preparation, Mick Mickelsen worked tirelessly with the client to prepare her to testify at trial. The jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all counts.
A prominent Dallas business executive was charged in a complex case involving allegations of financial fraud of over $6 million. After a week-long trial in federal court in Dallas, with Clint Broden as his attorney, a jury found him NOT GUILTY on all counts.
Mick Micklsen tried a multi-week trial involving 79 counts of alleged environmental laboratory fraud. A Dallas federal jury found Mick’s client NOT GUILTY of each and every count against him.
Clint Broden represented a client charged in federal court in Dallas with passing counterfeit money at the Galleria Mall. Despite the fact that a pile of counterfeit money was located under one floor mat of the client’s car and was separated from a pile of legitimate money found under the other floor mat, the client was found NOT GUILTY on all counts.

Federal Healthcare Fraud Trials

A doctor charged with Medicare fraud in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas faced a prison sentence and loss of his medical license. The government knew that Broden & Mickelsen was fully prepared to try his case and, shortly before trial, both partners working together negotiated a settlement in which the client was placed on pretrial diversion without any conviction or damage to his license. He continues to practice medicine and his career has flourished.
The client was charged in federal court in San Diego, California (the Southern District of California) with illegally marketing online prescription medicine. The client faced years in prison if convicted. After a four month trial, the jury was unable to reach a verdict. Because of the hung jury, the client was ultimately offered a one year term of probation instead of the years of imprisonment he had been facing.

Federal Criminal Tax Trials

A jury in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas returned a NOT GUILTY verdict on all counts in a tax fraud case in which Clint Broden’s client was charged with filing 27 false corporate tax returns.

Federal Computer Crimes Trials

Mick Mickelsen’s client was charged with computer sabotage in Sherman, Texas (the Eastern District of Texas). The jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all counts whereas the client’s co-defendant was convicted and was sentenced to prison.
Clint Broden’s client was charged with computer sabotage in Judge John McBryde’s court in federal court in Fort Worth. The jury found the client NOT GUILTY on all counts.

Federal Drug Trafficking Trials

A client with three prior federal drug convictions was facing 22-27 years imprisonment for being a career criminal. Clint Broden and Mick Mickelsen traveled to federal court in Midland, Texas (the Western District of Texas) and the client was found NOT GUILTY after a three-day trial.
A United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida dismissed a federal drug case involving large amounts of cocaine on the second day of trial because of the government’s discovery violations. The client, who had previously been represented by ten different lawyers, was released after spending over seven years in prison. Not satisfied, Clint Broden and Mick Mickelsen filed of a” Hyde Amendment Motion.” The federal judge found that the government’s prosecution of the defendant had been in bad faith and ordered the government to pay all attorney fees and costs incurred by the defendant. This is one of only a handful of Hyde Amendment motions that have ever been granted in the nation.
Clint Broden represented a client who was charged in federal court in Dallas with distributing large amounts of marijuana. The client was found NOT GUILTY by a jury after Clint’s investigation proved that the client was not in Dallas during the times the government claimed he was distributing marijuana.

Forfeiture Cases.

Client had $68,000 cash seized during search of home. Broden & Mickelsen was able to convince the United States Attorney’s Office to return 100% of funds.
Client had $300,000 seized during an automobile stop. Due to the diligence of Mick Mickselsen every penny was ultimately returned to the client.

Other Federal Trial Cases

A client charged in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas with being a felon in possession of a firearm was found NOT GUILTY after only nine minutes of deliberation by a federal jury.
Broden and Mickelsen was appointed to represent a man charged in federal court in Dallas with threatening to kill President Clinton. The client was found NOT GUILTY after a bench trial.

Evidence Suppressed

Many lawyers will tell clients that it is impossible to win a suppression motion in federal court. Broden & Mickelsen has proven otherwise.

All evidence was suppressed following a roadside stop by DPS officers in a bankruptcy fraud case in federal court in Dallas.
Dallas federal court suppressed all evidence following the search of a client’s car and the seizure of a gun in a case in which the client faced a fifteen-year mandatory imprisonment sentence because of his prior felony record. Clint Broden was successful in arguing that the search of the car was unconstitutional.
Dallas Federal court suppressed all evidence following the search of a client’s home in a case in which the client faced a ten-year mandatory imprisonment sentence.
Dallas Federal court suppressed all evidence suppressed following search of a client’s home in a case in which the client faced a five-year mandatory imprisonment sentence.
All evidence suppressed following the search of a client’s home in a case in which the client faced a ten year mandatory imprisonment sentence. The case was heard in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
All evidence suppressed following search of a client’s home in a case in which the client faced a five year mandatory imprisonment sentence. The case was heard in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Sentencing Hearings

Clint Broden represented one of the defendants charged in the Dallas “city hall” scandal, however, his client was sentenced to only twelve months imprisonment.
Clint Broden’s client charged with dumping toxic waste was convicted at a trial held in Dallas while being represented by another lawyer. The client faced more than six years imprisonment. After a lengthy sentencing hearing with the Court sustaining many of Clint’s objections to the calculations of the client’s Sentencing Guidelines, the client was sentenced to only fifteen-months imprisonment.
A client charged with bank fraud in the Fort Worth was convicted at a trial while being represented by another lawyer. The client faced approximately three-years imprisonment. After a lengthy sentencing hearing conducted by Clint Broden, Judge John McBryde sentenced the client to only six months imprisonment.
A client went to trial and was convicted with another attorney in the Austin (Western District of Texas) but hired Broden & Mickelsen to represent him at sentencing. Despite facing 5 years imprisonment under the Sentencing Guidelines, the client was sentenced to only 1-year imprisonment.
A client who pleaded guilty and admitted to being part of a $30,000,000 fraud scheme received a sentence of probation.

Other Federal Court Success:

Clint Broden was retained to represent the spouse of an employee of the United States Probation Department in a case in federal court in Tallahassee, Florida (the Northern District of Florida). The client was charged with failure to pay child support for a child in another jurisdiction. Clint was successful in getting the case dismissed after several trips to Florida.
Following a federal jury trial in Dallas, the jury found Clint Broden’s client not guilty on one of the charges against him but found him guilty of stealing a firearm at a gun show. Nevertheless, Clint convinced the federal judge to disregard the jury’s verdict and enter a judgment of acquittal after showing that, under federal regulations, that gun seller was not permitted to be selling the firearm in question at the gun show in the first place.

Results In State Court Cases

Sexual Assault Case Examples

Keep in mind that sexual assault cases is the type of case in which one stands the greatest chances of being falsely accused. Nevertheless, the charges themselves are often devastating. It is important to aggressively attack these cases early on.

In Dallas County Mick Mickslen’s client was found NOT GUILTY by a jury of sexually abusing his step-granddaughter.
In Dallas County Clint Broden’s client was found NOT GUILTY of the sexual abuse of his granddaughter. Following the acquittal, the client’s records was expunged.
Mick Mickelsen represented a young man charged with sexually assaulting a woman he met at a wedding in Collin County, Texas. Client was found NOT GUILTY of all charges following a trial.
Clint Broden’s client was charged with the sexual assault of a minor in Navarro County, Texas. Following Clint Broden’s cross examination of the investigating detective, a mistrial was declared. Ultimately the detective was charged with perjury and was tried and convicted. Thereafter the sexual assault charges against the client were dismissed. In other words, Clint’s client was exonerated and it was the lead detective who was ultimately convicted.
Clint Broden’s client, a high school coach, was charged with sexually assaulting a visitor in his home. After an extensive investigation by the Broden & Mickelsen, which required two trips to Illinois to investigate the alleged victim, the charges were completely dismissed shortly before trial.
Clint Broden’s client, was charged with sexually assaulting a woman who he met online. After a full and extensive investigation into the woman’s background and preparation of a grand jury packet, the Rockwall County grand jury refused to indict the client.
Mick Mickelsen’s client in Ellis County, Texas was facing 25 years to life in prison for the alleged sexual assault of a child until the State realized the strong case that Mick had prepared on behalf of his client and dismissed charges .
Clint Broden’s client was charged In Colin County, Texas with sexual assault of his niece. The last plea offer prior to trial was 20 years imprisonment. Clint and co-counsel obtained a hung jury (7-5 in favor of “not guilty) after a week long trial.
Clint Broden represented a client charged in McLennan County Texas with sexually assaulting his child. The client had previously been represented by two different Waco lawyers. When Clint inherited the case he had the client successfully pass a polygraph. After several meetings with members of the district attorney’s office, Clint was able to get the case dismissed.
Shopkeeper who was represented by Clint Broden was charged with sexual assault of a child. Clint arranged fro the client to take a polygraph exam and presented prepared a grand jury packet for a Dallas county grand jury. The grand jury refused to indict the client.

Murder Case Examples

Mick Mickelsen client was charged with murder and he was facing a life sentence. A Dallas County jury found Mick’s client NOT GUILTY of despite the fact that he was identified by an eyewitness and implicated in the murder by his accomplice.
A college freshman was brought to Clint Broden by a Dallas civil lawyer after her boyfriend threatened to implicate her in her father’s murder. Based upon the firm’s investigation, the boyfriend was charged and convicted of murder and the client was not charged at all.
A Broden & Mickelsen client was initially charged with first degree murder but was only indicted for failing to render aid after the firm’s presentation to a Dallas County grand jury. The client ultimately received a sentence of probation.
Clint Broden’s was initially charged with first degree murder but, after an extensive investigation by Broden & Mickelsen, the charge was reduced to simply being a felon in possession of a firearm.

Other Cases

Clint Broden took the lead in relation to the Twin Peaks incident involving a shootout between rival motorcycle groups in Waco, Texas that made national news. Over 170 motorcyclists were arrested and approximately 154 were ulitimately indicted. Clint represented several of the motorcyclists and was such an effective advocate that the district attorney and local judge in McLennan County actually tried to gag him. He fought the gag order and had it overturned by the Waco Court of Appeals. In some of the cases he had the local judge recused. In other cases he had the district attorney recused and an independent prosecutor appointed. Later, as a result of Clint’s aggressive defense of the motorcyclists and the nationwide publicity it received, the McLennan County District Attorney lost his reelection bid. Ultimately, each and every single indictment was dismissed. As a result of his tireless efforts on the case Clint was named “Texas Criminal Defense Lawyer of the Year” in 2018 by the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyer Organization.
Client, a school teacher, was charged with possession of child pornography following a search of a computer located at his home. Case was dismissed after Clint Broden had all the evidence obtained in the search of the computer suppressed based upon lack of probable cause and the fact that the detective made false statements in the search warrant affidavit.
Client admitted guilt in eleven home invasion/robberies. At the punishment phase of the trial, the State requested the jury sentence him 50 years imprisonment. Based upon Mick’s preparation for the client to testify at the punishment phase as well as his closing argument, a Dallas County jury sentence the client to probation.
A client was found NOT GUILTY by a Dallas County jury of making telephone threats
A client was found NOT GUILTY by a Dallas County jury of unlawfully carrying a weapon
A client was found NOT GUILTY of criminal mischief case following a trial in Dallas County.
Clint Broden’s client charged with unlawfully carrying of a weapon had his case dismissed after a successful hearing in which Clint convinced a Dallas County judge that the seizure of the gun had been unconstitutional.
Immediately after being convicted in a drug case and sentenced to a long term of imprisonment in Cooke County, Texas, Client hired Broden & Mickelsen. Clint Broden filed a Motion for New Trial based on the Client’s trial attorney having a conflict of interest. Client’s conviction was vacated and a new trial was ordered.
Client was charged with securities fraud in state court in Panola County, Texas. Case was dismissed after Clint Broden filed a motion to quash the indictment.
The client confessed to participation in drive by shooting with two co-defendants. The co-defendants pleaded guilty. Nevertheless, the defense investigation conducted by Broden & Mickelsen established that client’s confession and the confession of two co-defendants were false. Case dismissed against client.
A Texas State Trooper was being investigated for aggravated perjury and hired clint Broden. Following Clint’s presentation to a Collin County grand jury, the grand jury refused to return an indictment against the trooper.
A client’s felony theft charge was dismissed after Clint Broden convinced a Dallas County judge that double jeopardy applied based upon the client’s other misdemeanor charges.
A school coach represented by Clint Broden and who was charged with failure to report abuse had his charges dismissed in Kaufman County, Texas as a result of Clint’s motion to dismiss based on statute of limitations grounds.
A client arrested for possession of drugs had all charges dismissed following Broden & Mickelsen’s grand jury presentation.
Mick Mickelsen’s client, a professional truck driver, was found NOT GUILTY of failure to yield. This was an important victory because, based on that verdict, Mick convinced the District Attorney not to pursue negligent homicide charged against the client.
A Dallas County grand jury refused to indict a client for felony violation of a protective order after a grand jury presentation made by Broden & Mickelsen.
A Tarrant County grand jury refused to indict a client for failure to register as a sex offender after a grand jury presentation made by Clint Broden to the grand jury.

Results in Texas Criminal Appeal Cases

There are several lawyers that regularly handle criminal appeals in state court and a few that handle criminal appeals in federal court. Broden & Mickelsen have a long history of winning appeals in both state and federal court.

Mick Mickelsen represented a client on appeal who had been charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child. The client had went to trial with another lawyer and was convicted and sentenced to twenty-years imprisonment. The client’s conviction was REVERSED, and a new trial ordered. The client later agreed to a sentence of deferred adjudication probation.
Clint Broden represented a client on appeal who had been charged in with aggravated sexual assault of a child. The client had went to trial with another lawyer and was convicted and sentenced to sixty years imprisonment. The client’s conviction was REVERSED, and a new trial ordered. The client was later allowed to plead to “time served.”
Mick Mickelen successfully persuaded the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to unanimously REVERSE the decision of the lower court of appeals in State v. Ruffin. At issue was the admissibility of mental impairment evidence in the guilt-innocence phase of the trial when the defendant was not directly putting insanity at issue.
Client had been found guilty of drug distribution in Midland, Texas and sentenced to 68 years imprisonment when he was represented by another lawyer. Clint Broden represented the client on appeal and convinced the Court of Appeals that the trial court erred in giving the jury its jury instructions and the conviction and 68-year sentence was REVERSED.

Results In Federal Criminal Appeal Cases

Clint Broden’s client went to trial with another lawyer and was convicted of money laundering and sentenced to over 20 years in United States District Court in Tyler, Texas. With Clint handling the appeal, the client’s conviction was REVERSED, a judgment of acquittal was ordered, and the client walked out of prison a free man.
Clint Broden’s client was convicted of distributing obscenity in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas and was sentenced to 30 months imprisonment. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit REVERSED the conviction and the client was released from prison.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit REVERSED the client’s conviction for escape based upon a Mick Mickelsen’s argument that the trial judge gave erroneous jury instructions at the trial.
Clint Broden’s client was convicted of conspiring to distribute controlled substances inside a federal prison. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit REVERSED the conviction.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the client’s conviction after finding that the District Court erred in denying the pretrial suppression motion that Clint Broden had filed on behalf of the client. Because of the Fifth Circuit’s REVERSAL, the case was dismissed.
Clint Broden’s client had been sentenced to fifteen months imprisonment, but the United States Court of Appeals for Fifth Circuit REVERSED the sentence because the judge incorrectly applied the United States Sentencing Guidelines. As a result, the client’s sentence was reduced from fifteen months of imprisonment to probation.
The client, a schoolteacher, was sentenced to jail but had his sentenced REVERSED by the United States Court of Appeals for Fifth Circuit after a written brief by Clint Broden and oral argument by Mick Mickelsen.
The United States Court of Appeals for Sixth Circuit REVERSED the sentence from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee based upon errors by the district court in applying the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Clint Broden argued the case before the Sixth Circuit in Cincinnati.
Mick Mickelsen represented a doctor before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit after his conviction for medicare fraud in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas while he was represented by another attorney. Mick persuaded the Fifth Circuit to REVERSE the doctor’s sentence in what has become one of the leading appellate cases in healthcare fraud cases on the issue of “loss.”
Clint Broden represented a provider of durable medical equipment after the client’s sentencing in federal court in Beaumont, Texas with another lawyer. Clint won the client’s appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit based upon his argument that the district court improperly calculated “loss” under the Sentencing Guidelines and the client’s sentence REVERSED and was substantially reduced at his resentencing.
Clint Broden represented a client who had been convicted for drug offenses in the United States Court of Appeals for the Western District of Louisiana. The United States Court of Appeals REVERSED the client’s life sentence based upon Clint’s arguments related to errors made by the district court at sentencing.
Client in the Southern District of Texas was convicted of money laundering while represented by different counsel. The client, who was a home healthcare provider, was represented on appeal by Clint Broden and those convictions were REVERSED by United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Sentencing enhancement for being a leader of a drug conspiracy was REVERSED and the client’s sentence was reduced by seven years.

Post-Conviction Cases

Clint Broden represented a juvenile client pro bono for approximately six years. The Texas Supreme Court considered what appears to its first habeas corpus case related to a juvenile case. Normally habeas cases are considered by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals but, because this was a juvenile case, it was considered civil in nature. Texas Supreme Court granted the client habeas relief and found that the state presented false evidence at the client’s sentencing (disposition) hearing.
Clint Broden represented a client who had been sentenced in state court to 70 years imprisonment for robbery. In a post-conviction proceeding in federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 22554 (a “2254 motion”), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the client’s conviction after finding Dallas County prosecutors improperly struck two African-Americans from the jury that heard his case.
In a federal habeas corpus proceeding arising out of conviction in the Western District of Louisiana, Clint Broden convinced the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that the client’s prior lawyer was ineffective for failing to pursue certain sentencing guideline arguments and, as a result, the client received a sentence reduction of five years.
A client was convicted in a drug case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana and also appealed his sentence. Later he hired Clint Broden to review his case to determine if he received ineffective assistance of counsel from his trial or appellate attorney. Clint discovered that the trial attorney and the appellate attorney completely missed an issue which would have established the client was not guilty of the offense for which he was convicted. After Broden & Mickelsen filed a 2255 motion for the client, his conviction was vacated and his prior attorneys were found to have been ineffective.
A defendant was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment in state court for sexual assault of a minor. After going through several lawyers, the client hired Clint Broden to file an “11.07 post-conviction writ” for him. As a result, the client’s sentence was reduced to 10 years imprisonment based upon the argument that the client received ineffective assistance of counsel from his original lawyer. The client walked out of state prison the day the writ was granted.
The client was sentenced to prison in state court and hired Broden & Mickelsen to represent him in a post-conviction petition. The client prevailed based upon the argument that his prior counsel was ineffective for informing him that he was eligible for boot camp and/or shock probation when, in fact, he was not.
The client was represented by Clint Broden in a “2254 post-conviction proceeding” in federal court after he was convicted in state court. The state conviction was vacated after the federal court held that the state trial was unfair.
The client was granted anew appeal in federal court after Clint Broden was able to prove that his former lawyer actually committed perjury and backdated documents that she had sent to the client.
The client was represented in federal court in a probation revocation hearing and received a sentence of five years imprisonment. In a “2255 post-conviction proceeding,” Broden and Mickelsen convinced the Court that she received ineffective assistance of trial and she was immediately released from prison.
The client was represented in federal court by a then prominent Dallas lawyer. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to prison but his lawyer forgot to preserve his right to appeal his suppression motion. The client was represented by Clint Broden in a “2255 post-conviction” proceeding and was allowed to withdraw his plea.