The firm · D.C. Superior Court
Results and Case Wins
Jamison Koehler tries cases in D.C. Superior Court and argues appeals in the D.C. Court of Appeals. These are representative results: acquittals after trial, charges dismissed by the government before trial, protection order petitions dismissed or denied, and convictions reversed on appeal. Every case is different, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. To talk about yours, call 202-549-2374.
| Court | D.C. Superior Court; appeals to the D.C. Court of Appeals |
|---|---|
| Kinds of result | Not-guilty verdicts after trial; charges dismissed by the government; CPO and ASO petitions dismissed or denied; convictions reversed on appeal |
| What usually decides them | Investigation: surveillance and body-worn camera footage, phone records, social media, witnesses |
| Investigator | Robert Kapler |
| Reach him | 202-549-2374 |
What has Koehler Law won at trial in D.C. Superior Court?
Acquittals in D.C. Superior Court include aggravated assault; simple assault in three separate cases; destruction of property; misdemeanor sexual assault; drug charges; and carrying a pistol without a license together with other firearm charges. Recent verdicts:
- September 2026: a D.C. jury found a Koehler Law client not guilty of carrying a pistol without a license and all other firearm charges. The client had found an abandoned gun in an alley and picked it up intending to turn it over to police; a seizure intervened before he could. The defense was innocent or momentary possession under Hines v. United States, 326 A.2d 247 (D.C. 1974), and Evans v. United States, 304 A.3d 211 (D.C. 2023).
- March 2026: not guilty after trial on a simple assault charge alleging the client threatened another person with a knife.
- November 2024: across-the-board acquittals in two back-to-back jury trials, three counts in the first case and six in the second. The defense argued self-defense in the first and mere presence in the second.
- September 2019: not guilty of destruction of property, where the client was accused of breaking a car door handle in a parking garage dispute. The court found the government had not proven criminal intent; the evidence was consistent with trying to open the door, not break it.
- September 2019: acquittal on destruction of property, a convenience store door damaged while another customer held it shut. The surveillance footage showed the client trying to leave, not to damage anything, consistent with Harris v. United States, 125 A.3d 704 (D.C. 2015).
- September 2019: not guilty of unlawful entry. Body-worn camera footage showed the client standing at a public bus stop when police arrived, not on the gas station property as the police report claimed.
Which charges has the government dismissed before trial?
A dismissal is the government withdrawing the charge. In these cases it followed evidence the defense produced.
- Simple assault, September 2026: Social media evidence showed the complainant had documented two other confrontations at the same demonstration and was soliciting money from the attention; the 86-year-old client's self-defense claim held up and the government dismissed.
- Burglary, robbery and assault, June 2026: Ring camera footage showed the client tapping on the door and being let in, not forcing entry; lobby video and phone records contradicted the complainant's sworn account. Every charge dismissed.
- Hit-and-run, March 2026: Evidence that the client had called 3-1-1, and an eyewitness who told prosecutors the alleged victims appeared to be faking injuries before leaving the scene themselves.
- Resisting arrest, March 2026: Surveillance recordings obtained by the defense investigator disproved the Secret Service officers' account; the client was protecting himself, not resisting.
- Drug possession (consent search), December 2020: All three officers activated their body-worn cameras only after the client was handcuffed, so there was no recording of the consent the police report claimed.
- Unlawful entry, December 2019: Foster v. United States, 218 A.3d 1142 (D.C. 2019), decided on identical facts at the same apartment complex; the client's lease proved she was an authorized resident and the government dismissed.
What results has Koehler Law obtained in protection order cases?
Koehler Law represents petitioners and respondents in civil protection order and anti-stalking order cases. Recent results for respondents:
- September 2026: a client who prevailed as the respondent in a CPO case was awarded his attorney fees after the court found the petitioner had brought the case in bad faith, fabricated evidence and committed perjury at trial.
- September 2026: a stalking case dismissed mid-trial for lack of evidence.
- August 2026: an anti-stalking order petition arising from a noise dispute between next-door neighbors dismissed for failure to state an actionable claim.
- August 2026: a request for a civil protection order denied after the court found the client had not engaged in stalking.
- 2026: a CPO petition dismissed after the parties reached an out-of-court settlement, so the client faced no court-enforceable order at all.
What has Jamison Koehler won on appeal?
Notable decisions from the D.C. Court of Appeals:
| Case | Citation | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Curtis Best v. United States | 66 A.3d 1013 (D.C. 2013) | Simple assault conviction overturned; admitting hearsay testimony violated the client's constitutional rights. |
| James Schools v. United States | 84 A.3d 503 (D.C. 2013) | Conviction reversed; no reasonable jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the client possessed the firearm. |
| Josue Lopez Ambrocio v. District of Columbia | 124 A.3d 628 (D.C. 2015) | Remanded for further findings; the government failed to meet its obligations under the Jencks Act. |
| DeAndre Brooks v. United States | 130 A.3d 952 (D.C. 2015) | Conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia reversed for insufficient evidence. |
What do these results have in common?
Most of them were won before anyone stood up to argue. Surveillance video, body-worn camera footage, phone records and social media either contradicted the complaining witness or the police report, or showed exactly what the client said happened. Much of that evidence was gathered by the firm's investigator, Robert Kapler.
The rest turned on knowing the law as it stands in D.C.: the elements of criminal intent in a destruction of property case, what counts as an authorized resident under Foster, how long innocent possession of a firearm can last under Hines and Evans, and what an anti-stalking order petition must actually allege. That is the advantage of a practice confined to one courthouse.
Every case is different. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome, and no lawyer can promise one.
Questions people ask
Frequently asked questions.
Do these results mean my case will end the same way?
What is the difference between an acquittal and a dismissal?
Why do so many of these cases turn on video?
Who investigates Koehler Law cases?
Can charges be dismissed before trial in D.C.?
Does Jamison Koehler handle appeals?
Does Koehler Law win every case?
If you have been charged in D.C. Superior Court or served with a protection order petition, the work that decides the case starts now. Call Jamison Koehler at 202-549-2374.