David Zarmi has both prosecuted and defended on appeal a wide range of criminal offenses. Drawing on years of experience, Zarmi Law stands ready to represent you on any criminal appeal whether it be blue or white collar.
Zarmi understands the stakes are the highest when it comes to being accused of a crime. Having the experience at the Department of Justice of advocating the district attorney’s position through prosecution in the California and federal courts for over eight years has really helped Zarmi understand the inner workings of the criminal court system.
Often times people think of crime as isolated to the criminal justice system, however having experience in working on high profile cases, including those accused in the #Metoo movement, Zarmi intimately understands that there is often a civil consequence for the criminal allegations. Once a verdict is reached it’s important to retain counsel like Zarmi who can draw on years of experience, craft creative arguments, and push the law to address all consequences, including restitution.
Having first argued on his own granted petition for review in the California Supreme Court at the young age of 29, he learned early on what it means to not give up and successfully see a case through to the end and has been lead attorney in several Supreme Court cases since.
The advantage of retaining a Certified Appellate Specialist who has won over 300 appellate and collateral review matters is all in the results. Zarmi has the ability to adopt whatever position he has in front of him, solely focusing on the law applied, and employing his strong research and writing skills to create out of the box arguments that win.
The appeal process begins with the Notice of Appeal, a document that signifies your intent to challenge a decision. This must be filed within a specific timeframe, usually triggered by sentencing.
Once the Notice of Appeal is lodged, the court clerks and reporters prepare a formal record of all evidence and testimonies from the trial. These materials are scrutinized to assess if the original trial was conducted properly and if the rulings were legally valid.
In this phase, we present a structured argument explaining errors in the decisions of the trial court and/or jury. This typically includes a critique of the lower court’s decision, identification of any errors, and the legal basis for your appeal. The Attorney General in state cases and the United States Attorney in federal court will draft a response and we will file a reply brief addressing each of their counterarguments.
In an appeal, the onus of proof lies with the defendant. However, you and your lawyer get another chance to counter the prosecutor’s response. While new evidence cannot be introduced, you can highlight inaccuracies in the defense of the lower court’s decision.
Appeals may also involve Oral arguments that underscore the facts of the case, elucidate the importance of the issues, and provide clarity if questions arise. If the appellate court’s decision is unfavorable, a Request for Rehearing can be filed.
If the Court of Appeals makes a decision, you can still appeal to the respective Supreme Courts. A Petition for Review or Certiorari is the first step in this process.
Created precedent for bringing malicious prosecution cases against the federal government removing the discretionary function shield from law enforcement when they are alleged to have "fabricated evidence, tampered with witnesses, lied under oath, or otherwise knowingly offered false testimony to induce criminal charges against the plaintiff."
Supreme Court determination of the definition of metal knuckles and the application of the statute to possession of a metal pipe;
Supreme Court determination of the application of the burglary statute to second floor balconies;
Supreme Court determination as to whether reseating a juror who was improperly stricken requires explicit waiver by defendant;
Supreme Court determination as to whether two prior strike convictions resulting from the same act could act as first and second strikes in a Three Strikes case;
Capital case with more than eight separate issues including lying-in-wait special circumstance for “luring” the victim to the defendant’s home;
Appeal involving conviction of Temple City mayor for accepting bribery and related crimes;
Writ involving conviction of television contestant for rape identified by victim after watching television show Blind Date