US Army vs. E1 (Article 112a, Drug Distribution)
Fort Hood, Texas
This Client was originally charged with a host of charges to include Obstruction of Justice, False Official Statement, Conspiracy to Distribute controlled substances and several specifications of drug distribution. Mr. Jordan filed a motion to suppress a certain statement that the government gathered from Mr. Jordan’s Client. Mr. Jordan won his motion to suppress the statement in question because the Government failed to properly notify his client of his rights when they initially questioned him. Mr. Jordan carefully laid out the time line of events surrounding the taking of this statement. The timeline of events was key in unraveling the Governments intent behind taking the statement in the first place. Mr. Jordan’s thorough investigation behind the Government’s actions enabled him win his motion to suppress on behalf of his client, successfully wiping away half of the charge sheet his client was facing. Not to be outdone, the Government attempted to file an Article 62 interlocutory appeal to challenge the Judge’s ruling. About three weeks later, the Government withdrew their Article 62 appeal. All charges dealing with obstruction of justice and false official statement were effectively withdrawn and dismissed. Now, all that Mr. Jordan’s team had to contend with was the conspiracy and the drug distribution charges.
Once again, the time line of alleged events was crucial to the outcome of this case. Mr. Jordan and his team carefully pieced together the timeline of events surrounding the alleged time when the Client supposedly dealt controlled substances, by examining the call logs and full text message logs. This examination of the evidence by the Defense team led to careful planning of the examination and cross-examination of all witnesses involved.
The Government’s chief witness was a convicted felon who had already served about a year in prison. In fact, this was the Government’s only witness to any alleged drug dealing conducted. Mr. Jordan effectively exposed the Government’s chief witness to be a bold-faced liar during his cross-examination. The Government’s chief witness had testified in his own case. He had given several recorded statements. Mr. Jordan even had access to several prison call’s he made to other witnesses. Mr. Jordan had plenty to work with in order to effectively cross-examine him.
The Government also relied heavily on two text messages. Only two text messages were exchanged between the Government’s witness and Mr. Jordan’s client and they did not directly reference any conspiracy to distribute controlled substances. There were plenty of messages between the Government’s chief witness and other people detailing the sell of controlled substance, but none of those texts referenced Mr. Jordan’s client. The text messages that the Government so heavily relied on were turned against them. In the end, Mr. Jordan summed the whole case up in a stunning closing argument.