Largo, FL—While many defense attorneys would say that murder cases are the most complex cases to work on, John Trevena begs to differ.

“In my experience, I would say that DUI Manslaughter cases are the most complex, because sometimes you are representing people who have no criminal history, but are facing a double digit prison sentence for that type of offense,” Trevena told laws.com in a recent interview. “Sometimes you are representing professionals or mothers who are not alcoholics or frequent drinkers, but are faced with this type of criminal offense for a single mistake. They don't expect this type of punishment.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

For Trevena, who started practicing law in 1986, criminal defense was a natural specialty to work in. “I was a criminal justice major in undergraduate school,” he explains. “I was working as a police officer while attending law school, and after I received my juris doctorate, I was a prosecutor, so it seemed very natural for me to get into criminal law.”

One of Trevena's proudest moments in a case came when he was able to successfully vacate the conviction of Jean Claude Meus, a Haitian immigrant truck driver who had been convicted of vehicular homicide after prosecutors alleged that he caused an accident by falling asleep at the wheel.

“At that time, Jennifer Porter, a 29 year old part-Cuban woman widely perceived to be white, had received three years of probation, two years of house arrest and 500 hours of community service after leaving the scene of a car accident in which she struck two children, who later died,” says Trevena. “Meus, on the contrary, stayed at the scene and cooperated with investigators, but was charged with homicide.”

The accident, which killed a 40 year old woman and her daughter, was not regarded as a homicide even by the family of the victim, according to Trevena. “His case was striking enough that two sisters of the woman killed in the accident took up his cause, arguing that his trial wasn't fair. No alcohol or drugs were found in his system,” he explains. “I stuck with the case pro bono and was successful at having the conviction vacated and Mr. Meus released from prison."

Today's clients are more likely than ever to take plea deals instead of going to trial, and Trevena says that this is partly due to the resources available in the court system. “I believe that the system does not have the financial ability to sustain the number of defendants entitled to a jury trial. If everyone were to exercise their right to a jury trial, the system wouldn't be able to function.”

Plea bargains are also more common because courts have a perceived tendency to punish people who exercise their right to go to trial, Trevena explains: “As much as we may like to believe that the system does not punish those who take their case to trial, this is not true. This is, of course, improper and unethical, but at the same time, the courts justify it by saying that due to circumstances and facts arising during the course of the trial, it is okay to give a defendant a harsher sentence than the one presented in plea deal negotiations.”

The biggest piece of advice Trevena has to offer new attorneys is to care about their clients, not the rest of the players in the courtroom. “Don't be concerned about making friends with the prosecution or the judge,” he says. “Your role is to zealously advocate for your client. I see so many attorneys today who worry too much about what the prosecutor may think of him or her.”

To learn more about John Trevena and his practice click here.

Greenville, NC—After working for over 20 years in the legal profession, first as a prosecutor and then as a defense lawyer, Keith Williams believes that what he's doing today is one of the most important jobs in the system.

“In my opinion, those who want to limit the government, like conservatives, should be very supportive of the criminal defense lawyer function,” Williams told laws.com in a recent interview.  “In the United States Constitution, there is only one type of attorney that is mentioned: a criminal defense attorney.  The Founding Fathers of this country said that those accused of a crime shall have a right to counsel.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

As the only attorney in Greenville who is board certified by the North Carolina Board of Legal Specialization in both state and federal criminal law, Williamssees cases ranging from misdemeanors to murders.

In the last two decades, Williams has seen significant changes to the criminal defense profession, and one of the biggest of those changes has to do with plea deals.  “I have seen fewer and fewer cases go to jury trial,” he explains.  “Our challenge as criminal defense attorneys is to change this and not conform to the norm, and to take more cases to trial.”

Williams thinks that it is the duty of criminal defense attorneys to try cases in front of juries when possible, in order to keep the system working.  “Criminal defense attorneys should resurrect the model of taking cases to the jury.  It reinforces what we were meant to do as defense attorneys and our system of checks and balances,” he says.

According to Williams, it wasn't always like this—defense attorneys decades ago operated very differently, taking many more cases to trial.  “I think back on the role models I had back in the day, when I went to law school, and how different things are today,” he reflects.  “My knowledge of that vision is one of the most important things I can pass on to the next generation of attorneys.  They have to know this vision, so they know there is another path they can take.”

To that next generation of attorneys, Williams gives clear advice: “Today, there are more and more people attending law school, so the pool is too large for someone to just go to law school and just hope for the best.  I would suggest going to law school with a plan.”

Williams also takes questions on a television and radio call-in show, “Call the Law,” which airs in and around Greenville.  Once a week, Williams' co-host, Don Higley, answers questions about civil law while Williams takes on criminal law questions from regular people.

For Williams, a successful career in criminal defense has meant giving great service to clients, handling their cases from beginning to end instead of shuffling them off to paralegals.  It also means returning phone calls fast and really listening to client concerns.  “I have always looked at a criminal defense lawyer as a person who has a vitally important role in our society,” he says.  “I was happy to step into those shoes and do this type of work.”

Williams recognizes that bad things happen to good people and that is what motivates him to zealously advocate for his clients. His hard work has earned him numerous recognitions, including being named one of the best trial lawyers by The National Trial Lawyers.

To learn more about his practice click here. 

Jacksonville, FL—After time working as one of Florida's top prosecutors and one of its best defense attorneys, Harry Shorstein knows juries.

“I have always felt that, starting from your first contact with the jury, you try to develop a relationship with the jury members, who are the ultimate decision makers,” Shorstein told laws.com in a recent interview.  “The jury picks up on many things, such as the way you address the court and the witnesses, as well as opposing counsel.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

Knowing juries has meant being able to tell how cases are going before the verdict is returned. He says: “I have always felt I could tell whether I am losing or winning the case by looking at the jury as I address them.  I could always tell what the verdict is before it is given just by the way I communicate with the jury.”

A fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, Shorstein has been named the best attorney in the Jacksonville area for white collar criminal defense.  His private practice work for Shorstein & Lasnetski comes after five terms working as the State Attorney for Florida's Fourth Judicial Circuit, which covers Duval, Clay and Nassau counties.  In his current role, he has represented defendants facing criminal charges ranging from DUI to murder to all varieties of white collar crimes in State and federal courts.

During his work as a prosecutor, Shorstein implemented a juvenile rehabilitation program that was considered one of the best in the world.  Profiled on 60 Minutes and NBC's Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, the system Shorstein implemented in Florida was responsible for lowering juvenile arrests for violent felonies, weapons offenses, and car thefts by more than 50 percent.

Part of that program, Shorstein says, was just keeping kids in school.  “Studies show that serious juvenile offenders begin as habitual truants,” he explains, “so a key component of this program is keeping children in school—even if it means jailing their parents for not sending them.”

Shorstein thinks it is important to address juvenile crime, because this gives attorneys “the best opportunity to rehabilitate our youth.”

Today, defense lawyers face many challenges in and out of the courtroom.  Shorstein believes that some of the biggest challenges for public defenders and the people they represent is a lack of funding.  “Indigent people deserve the same defense as those who are wealthy enough to hire a defense lawyer,” he says.

Mandatory minimum sentences have also had an unfair impact on sentencing and criminal defendants, according to Shorstein.  “All homicides, robberies, and other crimes are not the same, therefore, the sentence shouldn't be the same,” he says.  “It doesn't make any sense having legislators in Florida or Washington mandating certain sentences.”

Shorstein also believes that the media have a part to play in making criminal trials fairer: “What we need is for the media to have a better understanding of the law, and to report on cases thoroughly and correctly.  These issues are complex, and therefore a lot of investigation and analysis of cases is required before people start talking and writing about them.”

Recently, U.S. Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio selected Shorstein to join the panel that recommends federal judges, prosecutors and marshals for Florida's Middle District. In 2010, he was nominated to become U.S. attorney for Florida’s Middle District.

With close to five decades practicing law Shorstein has developed extensive skills and experience in the representation of professionals in civil litigation and defendants on criminal matters in state and federal court.

To learn more about Harry Shorstein and his practice click here.

Jackson, MS—In thirty years working as a criminal defense attorney, Merrida “Buddy” Coxwell has built exactly the reputation he wants.

“I have developed a reputation as a fierce critic of social and legal injustice,” Coxwell told laws.com in a recent interview.  “This drive has compelled me to accept many criminal cases that other lawyers shunned or were afraid to accept.  When a person has a legal problem and needs help, I believe it is my job to set aside personal views in order to provide quality and aggressive legal representation.”

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

Listed as a Super Lawyer in the Deep South as well as one of the Best Lawyers in America, Coxwell has achieved great success in representing clients in cases ranging from fraud to murder.  His firm, Coxwell & Associates, PLLC, has been named one of the best law firms in the United States by U.S. News & World Report, and represents clients in serious personal injury matters as well as those accused of crimes.

Coxwell & Associates only takes personal injury cases that involve serious or permanent injury and criminal defense cases.  Coxwell believes that this kind of specialization is necessary in order to give clients the best service possible: “With the complexity and magnitude of laws that exist today, we do not believe that it is reasonable to try and handle every type of law.  Clients who are wise look for lawyers the same way they look for a medical specialist.”

The firm also doesn't handle what Coxwell calls “routine fender bender cases.”  Those, he says, “can usually be handled by individuals with legal advice” and don't require the aggressive and specialized representation that his law firm can provide clients.

Today, Coxwell says that the challenges for criminal defense attorneys are numerous and changing all the time.  “In the past, the greatest challenges have been the push to 'get tough on crime,' which was not based on reason,” he says.  “That has started to change, but ever so slowly, in the South.  I think that for most attorneys, the bad economy and the rise of public defender systems make the greatest challenge for criminal defense lawyers.  I would say that all the marketing on the internet seriously dilutes the base of clients.”

Coxwell has represented a number of defendants who were charged with capital crimes, and working on these cases can sometimes mean representing clients accused of crimes committed decades ago.  Currently, he is working on a death penalty case involving a crime that is 28 years old.

While many criminal defendants today take plea bargains, Coxwell says that it's critical for attorneys to avoid pushing plea deals on clients.  “My advice would be to meet frequently with your client,” he says.  “Get to know him or her as a person, not a defendant.  Exhaustively research the law before you even begin to discuss a resolution.  Don't let the first things out of your mouth be about a plea bargain, unless the client brings it up first.”

To learn more about Merrida Coxwell and his practice click here.

Minneapolis, MN—Defense attorney Patrick Cotter got his first dose of the courtroom by watching his father practice law.

“My father, as an attorney, was always working for the underdog,” Cotter told laws.com in a recent interview.  “He was both a mentor and my hero.”

When he was in his second year of law school, though, tragedy struck.  Cotter, who came from a family of five biological and five adopted children, had seen his adopted siblings work through a range of mental illnesses and chemical dependencies.  One of those siblings, however, had a break with reality resulting in fatal consequences. 

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

“My adopted brother, who had spent time in many juvenile detention centers and jails, strayed from his medication,” Cotter says.  “In an episode of full-blown paranoid schizophrenia, this brother killed my father and his girlfriend, and attempted to cover up the murders by setting the family home on fire.”

The brother later committed suicide while awaiting trial, and throughout, Cotter says he became “the default lawyer for my family, explaining the nuances of criminal law with just one year of law school under my belt.”

He believes that this experience shaped his future career: “The challenges that my family endured were many, and I do believe that overcoming some of those challenges has contributed to my success.”

After working as both a prosecuting attorney and a public defender, Cotter began his own practice.  Today, he's ranked as one of the “Top 40 under 40” attorneys by National Trial Lawyers, an award based on leadership, trial results, and qualifications.

Young attorneys, according to Cotter, should heed two pieces of advice: “Seek out mentors who both shares your values and are willing to invest in your growth as an attorney—and never give up the passion that you have right now for seeking justice.”

While Cotter has had great success in his career, he says that the profession currently faces significant challenges from attorneys trying to balance their books and sleep well at night.  “The profession of law is noble and ethical, and in representing those accused of crimes, it is very personal,” he says.  “The business of law has morphed into a game of sales, puffery and competition for paying clients.  This presents a moral dilemma for those attorneys truly wanting to uphold the profession and maintain a successful practice.”

One of Cotter's proudest moments came after a first degree arson case, in which his client had lost his home.  After the insurance company spent tens of thousands of dollars to ensure that the client was prosecuted, Cotter says things were starting to look bleak: “The insurance company representatives and law enforcement told my client that he was in a David vs. Goliath case, and Goliath was sure to win.”

Instead, he came away with a surprise victory after a week-long trial.  “I realized that the full power of money and resources can bring a person to the brink who claims his innocence” he says. “This case demonstrated that the government and insurance industry have enormous power and resources that make it very difficult for person who is falsely accused to fight them, however, in the end it is regular citizens with no skin in the game who have the final word.” 

To learn more about Patrick Cotter and his practice, click here.

New York, NY—Representing clients charged with violating criminal statutes and other First Amendment related laws is what Herald Price Fahringer and Erica Dubno do best.

“Many of our cases involve theaters, bookstores, publishers, and a whole variety of activities that come within the scope of the First Amendment’s protections,” Fahringer told laws.com in a recent joint interview with himself and Dubno. “My partner and I feel very fortunate to be able to practice in this area of criminal law, because it involves a great deal of personal satisfaction.”  They also have considerable experience handling all types of criminal and civil appeals.  

(More on News at LAWS.com, Contact Alberto for interviews “support@laws.com”)

With a combined 68 years of experience in the law — him with 50, her with 18 — the duo has become known for being excellent litigators, with Fahringer defending clients like Larry Flynt and Al Goldstein.  “Ms. Dubno is extremely intelligent, especially in the areas of research and litigation,” Fahringer explains.  “She and I have an advantage over an individual attorney, because our personalities and skills mesh so well and we each know how to work together on a case to coordinate our efforts for the best possible defense.”

Cases today look different than when either Fahringer or Dubno graduated from law school.  “Today, we live in a 'Law and Order' culture, where everyone thinks that every case should be like an episode on a TV show,” Dubno says.  “This usually leads jurors to be confused and disappointed.”

Fahringer says that one of the biggest changes to the judicial system has come from the plea agreement.  “When I came out of law school, you took every case to trial — plea deals weren't as available.  Now, about 95 percent of all cases are disposed of by a plea. Undoubtedly, being able to work out a good plea agreement has become very important in our practice.”

Deciding whether to take a case to trial today involves complex decision-making.   Fahringer says that “if the defendant has a viable defense, we will take the case to trial,” He notes there are other problems that can come from taking a plea deal or going to trial. “Today, more than ever, we have to examine the collateral consequences of a conviction,” such as weighing the problem of the client having to register as a sex offender. 

Dubno says that some cases are better off at trial than others.  For example, “when you have a defendant who may be able to testify and take the stand, and if his story is very compelling.” Moreover, “if a defendant has an issue with his immigration status, the plea deal might mean deportation.”

New attorneys should do as much trial work as they possibly can, according to Fahringer.  “To become a good trial attorney, you have to get into the courtroom, just like a boxer has to get into the ring.  You can’t become a good boxer by reading books. At the end of the day, you need to get into the ring to learn how to fight.”

Fahringer, who boxed for Penn State University and the U.S. Army, is known as a First Amendment Champion. He has handled over 15 cases in the Supreme Court of the United States. In addition, he has tried cases in over 27 states and has briefed and/or argued more than 300 appeals.

Both Fahringer and Dubno have been recognized for excellence in legal writing, as well as the practice of criminal law, and their contributions to the law. In 1995, Fahringer was honored with the Thurgood Marshall Award from the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers for outstanding contribution to the criminal law.

Today, Fahringer & Dubno provide clients throughout the United States with first rate, high-quality representation. To learn more about their practice visit www.fahringerlaw.com    

Ahmed Ghailani

Ahmed Ghailani was a member of the terrorist group Al Qaeda involved in the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Africa. His subsequent capture and trial was notable as a rare civilian trial of someone deemed an "enemy combatant."

Born in Tanzania, Ahmed Ghailani trained with the Al Qaeda terrorist organization and was a key part of the bombing of American embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi. The evidence that was presented against Ahmed Ghailani during the course of his trial included proof that he had purchased a truck which had been used in the bombings. Ahmed Ghailani was involved in the purchase of other materials used in the bombing, including the explosive TNT, gas cylinders containing acetylene and oxygen, detonators containing explosives and fertilizer.

After the African embassy bombings,  Ahmed Ghailani fled to Pakistan. While he was in hiding, he was named by the FBI as one of its most wanted fugitives. He was captured by American troops in Pakistan in 2004. Following his transfer into American custody, his status was reviewed by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal. During this time, he was held in custody at undisclosed locations abroad before being transferred to the Guantanamo Bay detention camp maintained by the military in Cuba.

It was eventually determined that Ahmed Ghailani would be tried in civilian court rather than before a military tribunal. Ahmed Ghailani was transferred from Guantanamo Bay to New York City in June of 2009 for a trial which began in October of 2010. During this time, Ahmed Ghailani expressed regret for his role in the bombings. His attorneys prepared a defense that did not deny any of the actions he had been documented performing. Rather, they claimed that Ahmed Ghailani was not aware of the larger purpose organizing his actions. They also claimed that he had been abused while in military and CIA custody, which justified a less severe sentence.

During the course of trial, Ahmed Ghailani faced 285 different charges. One was a charge of conspiracy to destroy United States buildings or property. The other 284 charges included 273 charges of murder or attempted murder concerning the death of casualties of the embassy attacks. During the course of trial, an undercover agent who had sold Ahmed Ghailani TNT was not allowed to testify as a witness.

Despite concerns expressed by the Obama Administration that a jury was likely to acquit such a defendant, Ahmed Ghailani was found guilty of a single count of conspiracy to destroy American structures or property. The judge ruled that due to the nature of the seriousness of the crime, Ahmed Ghailani deserved the maximum sentence of 36 years in jail. In his ruling, the judge rejected both the idea that Ahmed Ghailani was unaware of the purpose of his actions and the idea that any mistreatment by authorities while in legal custody justified a lesser sentence. The judge also ordered that Ahmed Ghailani to pay $33 million to the government and victims' surviving families.

Philip Markoff

Philip Markoff was arrested by the Boston Police Department for his alleged murder of Julissa Brisman in 2009. He committed suicide while in prison custody the following year.

Philip Markoff became the primary suspect in police investigations involving three women he met on Craigslist who were offering various forms of exotic services. The first of these women was a paid escort who was tied up and robbed at gunpoint, followed less than a week later by the death of Julissa Brisman. Nine days later, a third woman was the victim of an attempt robbery. The first two incidents took place in Boston, while the third occurred in Warwick, Rhode Island. The similarity of all three incidents and their close proximity attracted a vigorous police investigation.

As part of their investigations, authorities reviewed the phone and internet service records of Philip Markoff. He was arrested while driving on the interstate highway I-95 with his fiance and charged with the murder of Brisman. At his arraignment hearing, Philip Markoff entered a "not guilty" plea in response to all charges which had been filed against him. The judge ordered that Philip Markoff be detained without any bail. The prosecution gathered evidence against Philip Markoff which had been obtained during a search of his apartment, where guns and items used in restraining people were found. Additionally, the state of Rhode Island moved to prosecute Markoff for the third attempted robbery but agreed to suspend legal action until Massachusetts had completed criminal trial proceedings.

The trial of Philip Markoff was delayed by numerous legal complications, including a motion filed his attorney John Salsberg. This lawyer argued that the trial of Philip Markoff had to be delayed because the prosecution had released so much confidential testimony and evidence to the press that it had become impossible to form an impartial jury. The trial was ultimately moved from a scheduled July 2010 start date to March of 2011.

During this time, the amount of media coverage surround Philip Markoff remained consistent. Initially his fiance Megan McAllister issued statements of belief in his innocence. Later, she terminated her engagement to Markoff. During his time in custody, Philip Markoff made three separate unsuccessful suicide attempts, the second of which was prompted by the end of his engagement. These occurred from April to August of 2009, and involved attempts using shoelaces, an attempt to cut his wrists and a deliberate overdose of medication. After his first suicide attempt, Philip Markoff was put on a suicide watch. This was later removed.

In August of 2010, Philip Markoff succeeded in committing suicide. When his body was found, his former fiance's name was written in blood on the walls of his cell. Prosecution efforts have yet to be formally terminated. His successful suicide also caused the Boston City Council to note its concern about inadequate safety procedures in the city's correctional facilities, especially in monitoring inmates who were known suicide risks.

Edison Misla Aldarondo

Edison Misla Aldarondo served as a member of the Puerto Rico House of Representatives from 1977 until a series of scandals and legal problems led to his resignation in 2002. The primary legal scandal surrounding Edison Misla Aldarondo had its origins in the mid 1990s, when Puerto Rico began the process of privatizing its formerly state-operated hospitals. This process was overseen by two government entities, the Puerto Rico Department of Health (PRDH) and the Government Development Bank (GDB).

Edison Misla Aldarondo was involved in influence peddling regarding the Dr. Alejandro Otero Lopez Hospital (HAOL), which at that time was managed by the Caribbean Hospital Organization (CHC). HAOL received anesthesiology from Caribbean Anesthesia Services (CAS), which wished to purchase the hospital.

To effect this, the co-owners of CAS hired consultant Jose Ivan Ramos Cubano to assist in this transaction. Cubano first arranged for a meeting with the head of the legal department of PRDH and bribed him to allow CAS to purchase CHC's management contract, a necessary preliminary step to acquiring the hospital as a whole. Once this was done, Cubano approached Edison Misla Aldarondo, a close friend of the president of the GDB, Marcos Rodriguez Ema. Edison Misla Aldarondo accepted a bribe to arrange meetings between the anesthesiology company and the GDB.

In 1997, a law firm reviewing the potential hospital buyers warned that CAS should not be allowed to complete the transaction because it owed a substantive debt to the PRDH. However, Ema overruled this recommendation and arranged for CAS to purchase the hospital for $14 million. Ema also created an agreement to allow CAS to repay its debt to PRDH at a later date. Following this successful transaction, Edison Misla Aldarondo received payments totaling $147,000 from the hospital's new owners.

A 2001 investigation by the Puerto Rico Department of Justice led authorities to Cubano, who agreed to cooperate. In October 2001, Cubano recorded conversations he had with Edison Misla Aldarondo. In these recordings, Edison Misla Aldarondo openly discussed his illegal actions and outlined plans to create a false story concerning the payments he had received. These recordings led to an indictment by a grand jury by the end of the month. Subsequently, Edison Misla Aldarondo was convicted in a jury trial and sentenced to 71 months in jail.

In addition to his involvement in corrupt privatization practices, in 2002 Edison Misla Aldarondo was charged with rape of a minor. Witness testimony revealed that Edison Misla Aldarondo had taken advantage of a friend of his step-daughter by plying both girls with alcohol and prescription medication. During the hearings, it emerged that Edison Misla Aldarondo had also molested his step-daughter periodically over the course of eight years. Following his incarceration for the case described above, Edison Misla Aldarondo negotiated with the prosecution to plead guilty to attempted rape rather than rape, for which he was sentenced to an additional 13 years in prison.

Clarence Ray Allen

Clarence Ray Allen was convicted of multiple murders in California. His death penalty sentence was executed despite public controversy about his age the time of death, which was 76.

Clarence Ray Allen first came to the attention of the law because of a burglary he organized in 1974. He invited over Bryon Schletewitz, the son of his friends Ray and Frances Schletewitz, who owned a grocery store. By distracting Bryon, Clarence Ray Allen obtained the keys to the star. He then robbed the store with his son Kenneth and two other accomplices. Subsequently, Kenneth's girlfriend, Mary Ann Kitts, told Bryon about how she had helped arrange the burglary, and Clarence decided that she had to be murdered. Under his two direction, two associates attempted to poison her with cyanide before finally strangling her. The body of Mary Ann Kitts was never recovered.

From August 1974 through March 1977, Clarence Ray Allen planned and executed a series of robberies, not all of which were successful. One, an armed robbery of a K-Mart, ended with a gang member fatally shooting a bystander. Arrested for his role in the heist, Clarence Ray Allen was tried and convicted first for the robbery, then again for the murder of Mary Ann Kitts.

After being sentenced to jail on the first set of charges, Clarence Ray Allen was appealing the second conviction when he befriended fellow prisoner Billy Ray Hamilton, who was also incarcerated in Folsom State Prison in California. Allen convinced Hamilton to murder eight of the witnesses who had testified against him. Hamilton agreed and was released in August of 1980. After informing Kenneth Allen of his intentions, Billy Ray Hamilton went to the grocery store, murdering three of the employees and wounding another two. He was arrested within a week of the events.

Shortly thereafter, Kenneth Allen was arrested on separate drug charges and agreed to testify about the events leading up the killings in return for a plea bargain. In 1980, Clarence Ray Allen was put on trial for triple murder and conspiracy to kill eight individuals. He was found guilty and sentenced to death. Clarence Ray Allen filed an appeal, which was rejected by the California Supreme Court in 1987.

The appeals process led to another hearing before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2005. During these proceedings, the judges granted that the lawyers representing Clarence Ray Allen had performed their task inadequately, depriving him of his right to counsel, and that several other errors had occurred during the course of trial. However, they found that the evidence against Clarence Ray Allen was so unquestionably overwhelming that no retrial was necessary. A plea for clemency from the state's governor was rejected, as was a request for the Supreme Court to hear the case and another appeals court claim that executing a 76-year-old in ill health constituted cruel and unusual punishment. Clarence Ray Allen was executed by lethal injection in January of 2006.