‚ÄčCase Summary:
The defendant was charged with a single count of a fish and game code violation for failing to have a hunting tag in his possession. The charge arose after defendant was contacted by a game warden while defendant was hunting. The defendant had his tag in his vehicle, but not on him. The case was dismissed nearly 4 years later.

Attorney Comments:
This was probably one of the most pathetic cases I've ever been a part of. After having had no success in the field, the fish and game warden was actually hiding in the bushes when my client returned to his truck. Upon contact my client provided his deer hunting tag that was in his truck. However, because the warden claimed that my client was required to carry the tag on him, my client was cited for failure to possess a tag. I encouraged my client to fight the case because I thought it was so weak and, in my view, my client hadn't actually done anything illegal.

After a long delay in the case and several court appearances, the DA dismissed the case. Unless a person can experience this sort of thing first hand it is hard to imagine that the government will waste tax payer resources with such zeal.

Siskiyou County, California

Actual Case Summaries
Be advised that I never promise a client a particular outcome, details of prior cases should not be taken as an indication that other clients will necessarily see the same results.