This was one of the most interesting criminal cases handled by attorney Davar Yusufi.

Mr. Reyes was a business owner in Essex County, New Jersey. Because his business was slow, he decided to sell cocaine to earn extra money to support his family. He came under investigation by New Jersey state authorities, and confidential informants became involved prior to his arrest.

Based on information from a confidential informant, a transaction was expected to occur near a school zone in Essex County. The New Jersey police conducted surveillance and followed Mr. Reyes as he was driving. Another driver approached Mr. Reyes’s car, but Mr. Reyes realized he was being followed by the police. Through an assertive gesture (nodding his hand), he signaled the other driver to leave.

As Mr. Reyes was parking his car, police officers approached and asked him to roll down the window. Upon doing so, the officers observed a bag containing cocaine around the console area of his vehicle. Additionally, they found more cocaine in the trunk.

The police arrested Mr. Reyes and told him that if he consented to a search of his home for a handgun and no handgun was found, they would release him. Mr. Reyes agreed. Upon entering his home, however, officers discovered a cocaine lab and additional quantities of cocaine.

At the police station, with the assistance of an interpreter and a witness, the officers told Mr. Reyes that if he wrote on a piece of paper that the cocaine was his and that he intended to sell it, they would release him. Unfortunately, Mr. Reyes wrote exactly what they told him to and signed the statement.

He was charged with drug distribution, an indictable offense in the State of New Jersey. He initially retained a high-profile criminal defense attorney who negotiated a five-year prison sentence with the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office. Mr. Reyes, unwilling to accept the five-year plea, retained attorney Davar Yusufi.

Upon reviewing the facts, Mr. Yusufi identified a constitutional violation involving search and seizure. He noted that when the police first approached Mr. Reyes’s vehicle, the “plain view” exception to the warrant requirement would have applied only if the cocaine was visible on top of the console. However, the cocaine was located under the console and was therefore not in plain view.

Mr. Yusufi filed a motion to suppress the evidence and dismiss the indictment under the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, citing unreasonable search and seizure.

The presiding criminal judge, taking into account the circumstances and the mitigating factors—including the constitutional search-and-seizure issue—placed Mr. Reyes on probation, with no prison time.