Los Angeles Murder and Attempted Murder Defense Lawyer

David M. Dudley has won Los Angeles murder and attempted murder cases at trial in both federal and state courts. He has obtained the dismissal of numerous other such cases at preliminary hearings and other pre-trial proceedings.

Mr. Dudley has the expertise to defend murder and attempted murder charges. He has represented defendants in homicide and attempted homicide cases involving alleged federal drug kingpin murders, organized crime assassinations and street gang shootings. He also has represented individuals accused of vehicular homicide and defendants who have claimed self-defense.

Experienced murder defense attorney David Dudley, has won these types of cases by combining his superior intellectual acumen with an ability to present complex legal and factual issues in simple and understandable terms. His cross-examination skills are such that he can impeach the credibility of witnesses ranging from the most academically sophisticated forensic experts to the most street savvy government informants. If you are being charged with murder or attempted murder, contact our experienced Los Angles murder defense lawyer today!

Murder Statistics in the U.S.

In the United States in 2008, there were 14,299 murders, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) statistics. Of those victims, 11,154 were male, 3,103 were female and the sex of 42 remained undetermined.

Murder is defined as the killing of one person by another with malice aforethought. A first-degree murder is an unlawful killing that is willful, deliberate and premeditated. Second-degree murder is the unlawful killing of one person by another without deliberation or premeditation, but with malice aforethought.

What Are Defenses for Attempted Murder?

When it comes to attempted murder, prosecutors tend to fail when they cannot prove that the accused committed a direct step that demonstrated a specific intent to murder. Sometimes, however, juries may not convict due to a specific defense brought up by the defendant. Two defenses that may be common include:

• Impossibility – Although some states have passed legislation that abolishes this defense, it may still be relevant in many states. Essentially, the impossibility defense involves the defendant not denying any of the acts they are being accused of committing but arguing that it wouldn’t have mattered anyway because they would not have been able to carry out the murder. For example, the accused could say that the gun they were going to use was actually broken, so they would not have been able to fire it anyway. Therefore, the murder would have never happened
• Renunciation – Again, the validity of this defense depends on the state. This defense argues that although the defendant committed at least one step that shows an intent to murder, the accused decided not to commit the murder afterward.

What Are the Defenses to Murder?

Defenses to murder vary on a case-by-case basis. However, they generally take the form of mistaken identity defense, justified homicide, or insanity. Mistaken identity is when the defendant argues that the prosecution has charged the wrong person for the murder. Most often, a defense attorney will try to establish an alibi and provide evidence of that alibi. 

Justified homicide includes things like self-defense and the defense of others. Finally, the insanity defense is a defense that is not permissible in all states. In states where it is permitted, insanity is generally defined as being cognitively incapable of appreciating the act being committed or being unable to understand that it is wrong.

Experienced Los Angeles Murder Defense Attorney

If you’ve been accused of murder, you know you’re in serious trouble. Murder is considered one of the most heinous crimes one person can commit against another. It is punished by the harshest of penalties.

Being accused of murder makes you an unsympathetic character in the eyes of many jurors. You will need a highly skilled and experienced Los Angeles federal crime defense lawyer from the beginning, to ensure the best outcome to your case.

Mr. Dudley has the skill, the experience and the resources you need. He has won murder and attempted murder cases at trial in both federal and state courts and has obtained the dismissal of cases at preliminary hearings and other pre-trial proceedings.

He will scrupulously gather evidence, interview witnesses, and do whatever it takes to make sure you are tried fairly, that your side of the case is heard, and that you have the best possible chance of winning. Contact Mr. Dudley for an evaluation of your case.  He is admitted to the United States Supreme Court and seven federal circuit courts of appeal, and has also been admitted to practice in 44 federal district courts and 48 different state and county jurisdictions nationwide. Get in contact with our Los Angeles murder defense attorney today!

California Murder/Attempted Murder Defense: Selected Results

• S. v. A.B.: Murder case. Defendant charged with shooting decedent in the presence of several hundred people in downtown Cincinnati’s Fountain Square. Before dying, the victim identified the defendant as the man who shot him. An eyewitness also claimed that he observed the defendant commit the offense. Defense investigation and cross-examination at trial demonstrated serious questions about the prosecution’s case. The jury ultimately found the defendant NOT GUILTY.
• P. v. F.C.: Attempted Murder case. Defendant charged with shooting victim from the driver’s seat of his parked car. The victim positively identified the defendant as the perpetrator. The defense raised serious concerns about the credibility of the victim and the manner in which LAPD handled the investigation. The jury found the defendant NOT GUILTY.
• U.S. v. J.C.: Murder case. Defendant, allegedly the leader of a cocaine trafficking organization was accused of kingpin murder in federal court. He allegedly shot the victim himself. At trial, the government presented substantial forensic evidence and witnesses who claimed that the defendant had admitted to them his involvement in the murder. The jury found the defendant NOT GUILTY of the murder charge.
• P. v. J.H.: Murder case. Defendant charged with shooting an individual who had allegedly stolen drugs from him. An eyewitness identified the defendant as the perpetrator and two alleged accomplices testified against him as well. The defense challenged the question of the accomplices and the eyewitness’s identification. The trial resulted in a HUNG JURY.
• P. v. F.J.: Murder case. Defendant charged with pursuing decedent in a high-speed chase and then shooting him at close range with an AK-47. An eyewitness identified the defendant as the shooter and a receipt with the defendant’s name on it was found next to the victim’s body. The defense attacked the credibility of the eyewitness and demonstrated that other individuals had access to the vehicle from which the shooter had emerged. The trial resulted in a HUNG JURY.
• P. v. E.M.: Murder case. Defendant charged with assassinating a rival drug dealer. Witnesses placed the defendant at the crime scene. The court DISMISSED the case at preliminary hearing.
• P. v. E.S.: Murder case. Defendant allegedly committed a drive-by shooting. Multiple witnesses identified him as the shooter. The court DISMISSED the case at preliminary hearing.
• P. v. F.J.: Murder case. Defendant charged with instigating a gunfight over a love triangle, which led to the death of his rival. The girl involved in that triangle identified the defendant as the instigator. The court DISMISSED the case at preliminary hearing.
• P. v. K.S.: Murder case. Defendant charged with shooting a gang leader in a firefight. Rival gang members identified the defendant as the shooter. The court DISMISSED the case at preliminary hearing.
• P. v. N.L.: Murder case. Defendant accused of participating in drive-up shooting. An eyewitness placed in the car from which the shooter emerged and an accomplice claimed that the defendant encouraged the shooter to commit the crime. The court DISMISSED the case at preliminary hearing.
• S. v. T.R.: Attempted murder case. Defendant, allegedly the leader of a local drug trafficking organization in Milwaukee, accused of directing subordinates to shoot members of a rival group. Two people, both unfortunately innocent victims, were hit. Plea negotiations the day of trial resulted in a five-year prison term for the defendant, of which he only served two years.
• P. v. A.S.: Attempted murder case. Defendant, an alleged gunman for a major cocaine and heroin trafficking organization, shot a rival drug trafficker multiple times during the daytime in front of dozens of witnesses after providing his telephone number to one of those witnesses, a female he wanted to date. During an ensuing police chase of his van, officers unfortunately killed an innocent motorist. Due to defense investigation, which developed weaknesses in the prosecution’s case, the defendant received a negotiated prison term of three years and only served half of that.
• P. v. K.M.: Attempted murder case. Defendant accused of firing dozens or rounds of ammunition from a fully automatic AK-47 at rival Northern California drug dealers in a quiet, residential neighborhood during daytime hours. The court DISMISSED the case at preliminary hearing.
• P. v. E.M.: Murder case. Defendant accused of shooting a rival gang member in broad daylight with multiple civilian witnesses. Pursuant to a negotiated plea bargain, the defendant received a prison term of eight years, which ran concurrently with prison sentences he received in three other pending cases.
• P. v. D.Y.: Murder case. Defendant accused of killing major drug trafficker over monetary dispute and charged with first-degree murder. The jury ACQUITTED him of the principal allegation and convicted him of a lesser charge.
• S. v. C.P.: Murder case. Defendant, purportedly the leader of a local drug-trafficking organization, accused of murdering a customer. Defendant was convicted of murder at trial with another lawyer. On a writ of habeas corpus, Mr. Dudley was able to persuade the trial judge to SET ASIDE the murder conviction based upon substantial prosecutorial misconduct.
• Investigation of B.T.: Murder investigation. The target, a professional football player at the time, was investigation for a multiple homicide. The accused consulted with Mr. Dudley during the investigation. Based upon the police discovery of new evidence, NO CHARGES were ever file against the accused.
• Investigation of M.J.: Murder investigation. The target of the investigation was a convicted interstate narcotics trafficker who was supposedly involved in a street shooting. Mr. Dudley was able to convince Texas investigators that his client was not the perpetrator of the crime. NO CHARGES were filed.