Case Results

Marinaro Law Firm has successfully defended thousands of criminal defendants and has a long track record of success in family law. Below are just a few examples.

Criminal Defense case results:

Family Law case results:

Civil Action case results:


NOT GUILTY by JURY.  Ryan McNeil charged with numerous Felony Counts including Robbery, Person not to Possess a Firearm (because of past drug conviction) and Possession stolen Firearm.  He found Not Guilty of all charges by a jury of 12. "The jury didn't belei McNeil had a handgun in his possession," defense attorney Michael Marinaro said to the Lancaster News Paper.  "There was no forensic science that could connect my client to the gun that was found at the crime scene."  DNA swabs taken from the gun were never sent to the Pennsylvania State Police for testing, Marinaro said.  And the police were unable to lift identifying fingerprints from the gun, magazine, or bullets found at the scene.  "My argument to the jury was that my client was the person that was robbed by the so called victims/bouncers of "Molly's Pub".  Complete opposite agrument of what thevictims/bouncers testified to.  The credibility of the alleged victims was destroyed with very effective cross-examinations.  The district attorney's office offered a plea deal of five to ten years, which McNeil and Marinaro rejected in favor of a jury trial.  "If McNeil was found guilty, he'd be looking at 7.5 to 15 years in the SCI,"  said Marinaro.

NOT GUILTY by JURY:  J.V-I., was tried before a jury for Receiving Stolen Property (F- 3). The Commonwealth charged him with possession of a stolen vehicle.  Defense Attorney Michael V. Marinaro successfully convinced a jury of 12 that his client was not guilty. The trial lasted 2 days, and the jury found V-I not guilty after deliberating nearly 5 hours. If found guilty, Marinaro stated to the press that his client would have faced a State Prison Sentence.

  • NOT GUILTY.  R.W. was charged with Simple Assault (M-2) Domestic Violence. Allegedly our client bit the hand and neck area of the alleged victim. Furthermore, the alleged victim suffered a broken thumb. Attorney Marinaro litigated the matter and all charges were dismissed. Client remains with no criminal convictions and she will continue her pursuit to become a Registered Nurse.
  • NOT GUILTY by Jury:  Robbery with a Deadly Weapon (9 mm handgun). Attorney Marinaro represented J.F. in the very serious crime of Robbery. A jury trial was held and our client was found NOT GUILTY. The trial strategy was to attack the vulnerability of eye witness testimony. Client avoids Felony 1 conviction by retaining the services of Attorney Michael Marinaro.
  • NOT GUILTY by JURY:  Attorney Michael V. Marinaro persuaded a jury of twelve (12) to find his client not guilty of Felony 1 Robbery. Marinaro represented a young Lancaster County man who was facing decades in prison and is now free after a jury acquitted him of armed robbery with a shotgun. A.R.S., 20, faced two felony counts before the jury's verdict was read. The jury took less than 45 minutes to find Marinaro's client not guilty of a home-invasion robbery in which three individuals were assaulted and menaced with a shotgun. Each of the first-degree felony counts carried maximum 20-year prison terms. The Assistant District Attorney litigating the matter stated to the press: "I'm very disappointed with the result. I must respect the process and move on to the next trial." Following the robbery at a home in the second block of Howard Avenue, the shotgun and a knit hat with a San Antonio Spurs logo containing a unique pom-pom were left behind at the crime scene. Prosecutors showed the jury several photographs, from Defendant's "Facebook page," of him wearing the hat days earlier. Furthermore, after a struggle the defendant's black mask was removed, along with the San Antonio Spurs knit hat, and two (2) witnesses positively identified him. The said eye witnesses testified and were cross-examined before the jury. Marinaro successfully argued that the Commonwealth failed to perform DNA analysis on the San Antonio Spurs hat. Additionally, they failed to find fingerprint or DNA evidence on the shotgun left at the crime scene. No physical evidence was presented linking the defendant to the robbery was aggressively argued.
  • NOT GUILTY.  Attorney Marinaro represented R.A. for a DUI charge before the local Magisterial District Judge. The DUI charge was dismissed following negotiations. Furthermore, R.A. was subsequently released from prison. He was detained based upon a parole/probation violation stemming from the DUI charge.
  • NOT GUILTY BY JURY.  Client was charged with operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, second offense within the 10 year look back period. The police officer observed the defendant/client and her passenger changing a flat tire alongside the road. The officer stopped to assist. While speaking with our client he observed her to be unsteady on her feet, smelled a strong odor of alcohol emanating from her breath and noted her eyes were bloodshot and glassy. The passenger informed the officer that our client was the driver of the car. Attorney litigated this matter before a jury. Jury finds defendant not guilty!
  • NOT GUILTY.  In a hard-fought victory, Marinaro Law Firm Attorney secured a not guilty verdict in an Indirect Criminal Contempt hearing for V.B. After hearing the defense's evidence, the presiding judge took little time in handing down the favorable verdict. Using case law that was less than one-month old, we successfully litigated this matter by showing that V.B. did not have the requisite intent to violate the Protection From Abuse Order. Another example of the Marinaro Law Firm using up-to-date law for the benefit of its clients!
  • Commonwealth v. T.B. — Marinaro Law Firm represented T.B. in a summary trial on the charge of Harassment. In finding the Defendant not guilty of the charge, the Magisterial District Judge cited Marinaro Law Firm's theory of defense in establishing a legitimate purpose for her conduct. Further, after cross-examination, the MDJ did not find the Commonwealth witnesses credible.
  • Following a hearing that included the testimony by the Victim, the Police, and the admission of damaging photographs depicting serious bodily injuries the Judge dismissed all charges. D.H. was extremely pleased with Attorney Marinaro's cross-examination and overall representation. Furthermore, the Defendant was released from prison immediately when a Parole Violation detainer was lifted based upon the dismissal of the foregoing charges. NOT GUILTY.
  • NOT GUILTY by JURY.  Marinaro Law Firm represents defendant, Jose Rodriguez, who was found NOT GUILTY following Jury Trial. Marinaro Law Firm represented Jose R. for the charges of Riot (F-3) and Disorderly Conduct (M-3) before a Lancaster County Jury. Prior to trial the Commonwealth nolle prossed the felony Riot count and proceeded with Disorderly Conduct. Following a trial the jury returned after a brief deliberation with a verdict of NOT GUILTY!
  • NOT GUILTY by JURY.  Attorney Marinaro represents Raul Rojas who was Found not guilty of Aggravated Assault (F) in S. Lime Street Stabbing. Jury returns with verdict of Not Guilty in less than two hours. Jose Manuel Garcia suffered a 10-inch gash to his abdomen that required life-saving surgery after he was slashed at a city party. A local jury decided the man charged, 34 year-old Raul Rojas, wasn't the one responsible. Rojas was acquitted of all charges, including Felony Aggravated Assault. Garcia, 42, was cut from his belly button to his chest and nearly died, he sustained serious injuries to his vital organs. An eyewitness, Pedro Rojas — who is Raul Rojas' uncle — testified at trial that his nephew was the perpetrator. Following cross-examination the jurors didn't accept Pedro's testimony. Marinaro argued that the victim and Pedro's testimony was "not credible". The Jury acquitted Raul Rojas after less than two hours of deliberation. NOT GUILTY!
  • NOT GUILTY by JURY.  Attorney Marinaro represents Alejandro Y. in drug case. A.R.Y. found NOT GUILTY of selling cocaine. A jury acquitted a 26 year-old man accused of selling $450 worth of cocaine to an informant in a Lancaster Township restaurant parking lot. After deliberating for about 1 hour, the jury found A.R.Y. not guilty of delivery of cocaine. A.R.Y., an immigrant from the Dominican Republic, if convicted would have faced a minimum 3 year state prison sentence and deportation. Marinaro contended during the trial that drug task force detectives failed to confirm it was A.R.Y.'s voice on the recording made of the drug deal, no video or photographs exist of the defendant conducting the deal and fingerprint samples were not taken from the bag containing 14 grams of cocaine. "The jury thought this case out after listening to the closing arguments by me and the prosecution," Marinaro said after the verdict. "The jury made the right decision based on the lack of evidence against my client." Drug Task Force Detective M.N. alleged the defendant sold the cocaine to an informant as he watched the drug deal while sitting in a parked car about 40 feet away. A.R.Y. was not arrested on the day of the incident. He was eventually arrested while crossing the Canada-New York border. A.R.Y. was a free man after the not guilty verdict and released from prison. A.R.Y. hugged Marinaro after hearing the verdict. "He is very grateful to regain his freedom," Marinaro said, "He wants to resume his life." NOT GUILTY!
  • NOT GUILTY by JURY:  Marinaro represents teen for city home invasion. A.S. was found NOT GUILTY by jury to the charges of Burglary (F-1); Robbery (F-1); and Criminal Conspiracy (F-1). Following a decertification hearing the court denied counsels' request to transfer the case of Commonwealth vs. AS from the Adult Criminal Division to the Juvenile Division. The court deemed Marinaro's client was not amenable to treatment in the juvenile system. Thus, counsel litigate the matter before a jury in adult court. The result was not guilty on all the charges. AS helped Ransack an elderly man's Euclid Avenue apartment and then bragged about it to his friends, prosecutors say. Several witnesses and the victim testified against AS, 17, during the first day of his trial on charges of Burglary (F-1), Robbery (F-1) and 2 counts of Criminal Conspiracy (F-1). The Assistant District Attorney began building the case against AS by calling several witnesses, including Lancaster City Police Detectives and the Victim. Police said AS and two other teenagers rang the doorbell at the 86-year-old man's apartment about 9:00 p.m. When the victim opened the door, the teens pushed their way in. While AS detained the man, the two others scoured the apartment, investigators said. The teens took about $400 in cash and $500 worth of coins, electronic equipment, liquor and personal belongings. Lieutenant SG testified that the victim recognized AS during the preliminary hearing the victim yelled out: "That's him. That's the guy who spoke to me." A friend of Marinaro's client, SM, told the jury that AS told him about the burglary, showed him the coins and asked whether SM could "get rid of them" for him. SM refused to help AS. He feared AS would harm his family, he said, so he asked for protection. News Article Day 2: A 17-year-old Lancaster teen was found not guilty of invading, ransacking and robbing an elderly man's apartment. After the jury gave its verdict, the Court told AS, "You've been given a gift. I'm not sure I understand the jury's decision." "I hope you've learned something here, not that you can get away with things, but that you won't do it again," the judge said. "If you need something, work for it. Don't throw this gift away." Prosecutors accused AS of being one of three teenagers who pushed their way into the apartment of the 86-year-old man. One of the teenagers stood over the man with a pipe while AS and his friends searched for money, prosecutors argued during the two day trial. During an impassioned closing argument, the Assistant District Attorney told the jury how fearful the elderly man was of being beaten with the pipe. Defense attorney Michael Marinaro argued the prosecution's evidence did not put AS at the crime scene. Neither AS's fingerprints nor his hair was found at the man's apartment, and the initial report of the incident described all three assailants as "white men in their 20's," Marinaro said. Marinaro's client is a dark skinned hispanic. Marinaro said the investigators never brought the victim to the police station to witness a suspect lineup or showed him a photo array of possible suspects. Marinaro said the 86-year-old identified AS only when the teenager was brought into a courtroom wearing handcuffs during the preliminary hearing almost 4 months after the incident. Marinaro's client walks free, while the 2 co-defendants plead guilty to the home invasion Felony 1 offenses. NOT GUILTY!
  • NOT GUILTY by JURY:  Jury finds client Not Guilty in Drive-By Shooting. Attorney Marinaro represented Renaldo R-M on 4 counts of Criminal Attempted Homicide (F-1); 4 counts of Aggravated Assault (F-1) who was acquitted by a jury of 8 Felony(1) counts. A city man was acquitted on four counts of attempted murder for his alleged role in a drive-by shooting on Hager Street. The jury also found RRM, 33, not guilty on four counts of aggravated assault, but guilty on one count of recklessly endangering another person and not being licensed to carry a firearm. The jury began deliberating on Thursday afternoon and reached its verdict on Friday around 11 a.m. The Prosecutor, in his closing argument, said that witnesses saw RRM fire four shots in the direction of KO, Sr., and three other people as they stood outside the first block of Hager Street. The prosecution claimed the shooting was the culmination of an ongoing spat over a woman. Witnesses testified they saw RRM driving a van and shooting a gun matching the firearm that was recovered.Shortly after the shooting, police stopped RRM, who was driving a minivan and had a handgun wrapped in a T-shirt shoved under the front seat. The prosecution said that four spent cartridges were found in the gun that the police recovered, the exact number of shots taken at the victim and others.Defense attorney Michael Marinaro, argued that the vehicle was borrowed and that tests of RRMs' hands and T-shirt did not show any residual gunpowder, commonly found after a highpowered pistol has been fired. Marinaro also told the jury that forensic experts did not match the gun to the bullets or bullet fragments found at the scene. The Lancaster judge presiding over the case told RRM that he "dodged the bullet" when the jury acquitted him of attempted murder. The judge stated that if the jury convicted him of the attempted murder charges, he would be facing prison for the rest of his life. The court said to RRM, "you should appreciate that that's our system in America;" he now walks a free man. 4 counts of Attempted Murder and 4 counts of aggravated Assault —— NOT GUILTY!
  • NOT GUILTY by JURY:  Marinaro represented D.R. in which he was charged by the Lancaster City Bureau of Police with delivering several bags of Marijuana to a Confidential Informant (CI) while in the presence of an Undercover Detective. The Lancaster County District Attorneys' Office charged D.R. with the following: Count 1: Manuf/Del/Possession with Intent to Manufacture or Deliver Marijuana an ungraded Felony (F); and Count 2: Criminal Conspiracy to Deliver Marijuana, an ungraded Felony (F). Police alleged that D.R. agreed with D.P. to commit the crime of delivery of the said Marijuana. Moreover, the prosecution was to enforce the mandatory minimum sentence of 2 years' incarceration in a State Correctional Institution if D.R. was found guilty. The jury returned with a verdict of NOT GUILTY to the Felony offense of Delivery of Marijuana, and NOT GUILTY to the Felony Criminal Conspiracy charge.


•  Noel G-T was charged with his 7th Diriving While Operating Priv Suspended or Revoked, 75 Section 1543(a). Client was looking at a Mandatory 30 days jail w/ discretionary jail time up to months and a minimum fine of $1,000.00.   Attorney Marinaro obtain a dismissal of the charge.   Case Closed.  Not Guilt.

•  Client was charged with Simple Assault (M-2) and represented by Attorney Marinaro. H was accused of assaulting his girlfriend. The Commonwealth could not meet the burden of proof at the preliminary hearing and the charge was dismissed.

  • Client was charged with Stalking (M-1), and 2 counts of Terroristic Threats. Attorney Marinaro represented our client at the Preliminary Hearing and all charges were dismissed.
  • Dismissed charges of Burglary (F-1), Criminal Conspiracy to Burglary (F-1), Simple assault (M-2), and Criminal Conspiracy to Simple Assault (M-2). Attorney Marinaro represented A.F. regarding the above charges. Following negotiations, the Commonwealth agreed that the evidence was not enough to sustain a conviction.
  • Marinaro represented client in a Protection From Abuse Action. Following a hearing the court dismissed the claims.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented M.H. involving a DUS 1543 motor vehicle charge. Client had 6 prior convictions and was facing mandatory incarceration if convicted. A hearing was held; Marinaro cross-examined the Police Officer regarding his eyewitness identification of person behind the wheel of the client's vehicle. M.H.'s Father testified that he was the party driving the vehicle and not his son. Additional evidence was presented to the Court. Following closing arguments, the Judge dismissed the charge against M.H.
  • Attorney Hagy prevailed in a hearing on a prosecution from abuse petition brought against her client, P.S.; after a contentious hearing with two (2) days of testimony an Order to Dismiss was entered. Attorney Hagy successfully argued that the plaintiff's story was not credible. The Judge agreed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented J.M. against charges of Terroristic Threats with Intent to Terrorize Another; Simple Assault; and Harassment. ALL charges were DISMISSED at the Preliminary Hearing. Case closed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented S.M. in a criminal case and prevailed in obtaining a dismissal of a Resisting Arrest charge pursuant to 18 C.S.A. 5104 (M-2) at a Preliminary Hearing. Case closed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented L.T. when she was charged with Theft of Leased Property, namely a 73" Mitsubishi television and 54" television stand from Aaron's Furniture Store. Following negotiations, L.T. paid a portion of the requested restitution and all charges were dismissed. Case closed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented K.D. when he was charged with Loitering & Prowling at Night. Client was accused of peering through a mail slot on the front door, attempting to look through windows, and attempting to gain entry into the backyard location of a victim's residence. The prosecution claimed our client had no legitimate reason to be on the property. At the scheduled Preliminary Hearing the charge was dismissed. Marinaro's client remains without a criminal record whatsoever.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented K.Y. for the charge of Endangering the Welfare of a Child (M-1). Client's 5 year-old child was located wandering the neighborhood for an extended period of time on 2 separate occasions. The child did not know how to get home and had no contact information on her person. Unfortunately, client was sleeping when the child opened the door and exited the residence. Marinaro negotiated with the Assistant District Attorney to have all charges dropped upon the successful completion of the parenting classes.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented C.C. in Chester County, Pennsylvania on the charges of Possession of Hash Oil (M); and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia (M). C.C. was pulled over after he was observed operating his Buick Sedan with an inoperable taillight. C.C. provided the Police with consent to search the vehicle. Following negotiations the drug charges were Dismissed. C.C. pled guilty to the $25 fine for operating a vehicle without rear light (S). C.C. walks away without a criminal record; no probation; fines/costs and/or his drivers license suspended. Case closed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented C.G. on the charge of Criminal Mischief — Damage to Property. The victim and an independent eye witness appeared to testify at trial. C.G. was accused of damaging the victim's vehicle at a party. The damages were estimated at $600.00. The Misdemeanor offense was dismissed following negotiations. Client a promising college student with a bright future, will not have to disclose the above incident on college and/or job applications. Case closed.
  • Marinaro Law Firm successfully negotiated a non-traditional ARD resolution to a summary matter at the Court of Common Pleas. Rather than be found guilty of Disorderly Conduct, Marinaro Law was able to convince the Commonwealth to dismiss the charges after the client completed an anger management course and three (3) sessions. Just another example of Marinaro Law's ability to think "outside of the box" to obtain the best possible results for his clients!
  • Marinaro Law represented B.S. in a Children and Youth investigation. In an effort to avoid the imposition of a dependency action, Marinaro Law became immediately involved in the matter and stayed in close communication with the Office of Children and Youth during the entirety of the investigation. According to the Office of Children and Youth, the allegations against B.S. involved him choking his child on multiple occasions. After an approximately three (3) month investigation, the Office of Children and Youth determined the allegations were unfounded. As a result of the advocacy of Marinaro Law, B.S. avoided further agency and action and potential harm to his employment.
  • Marinaro Law represented J.H. in a criminal matter. J.H. was charged with one (1) count of Indirect Criminal Contempt. The violation would have been J.H.'s third violation of a Protection From Abuse Order. Despite the Commonwealth's attempts to delay the matter, Marinaro Law remained steadfast in belief that the matter needed to be litigated at trial. Immediately prior to the scheduled trial date, the Commonwealth moved to dismiss the charges against J.H. The Commonwealth had no choice to dismiss the charge given Marinaro Law preparation and tenacity in the matter.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented T.L. regarding a theft of $1,140.00 from a residence. Initially, the Commonwealth was seeking a conviction and 3 years probation for the defendant based upon significant evidence that the crime was committed by T.L. Attorney Marinaro convinced the prosecution to agree to a Dismissal of the case upon satisfaction of restitution. Under Rule 586 the court dismissed the crime against our client.
  • Marinaro represented E.J. when he was charged with striking his girlfriend in the face and head area. The victim had several visible injuries that were recorded. She was taken to LGH by ambulance for treatment. E.J. was unable to accept a conviction based upon his immigration status and work related issues. Attorney Marinaro negotiated to have all charges dismissed. The parties will remain separate and apart.
  • Marinaro Law represented M.L. in a Protection From Abuse (PFA) Action. Despite very serious allegations of abuse, the firm successfully negotiated the complete dismissal of the action. In exchange for a continuance for three (3) months, K.L. agreed to dismiss the PFA action. Further, Marinaro Law negotiated for M.L. the ability to contact K.L. about custody matters and to attend the pick-up and drop-off transfers of the children.
  • Marinaro Law represented T.O. in a criminal matter involving a significant amount of illegal drugs. T.O. was charged with one (1) Felony count of Possession With Intent to Deliver a Controlled Substance (F) and one (1) count of Criminal Conspiracy (F). The firm worked tirelessly to have the charges reduced to Simple Possession (M). The determination and tenacity of Marinaro Law paid off when the Assistant District Attorney agreed to dismiss the charges completely at the Court of Common Pleas.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented E.P.M. for the above-mentioned charges following a hit and run crash. The victim suffered severe damages to her vehicle. Police followed a fluid trail from the crash to a parking lot and the Defendant's vehicle. E.P.M. was in the back seat of the car; he fit the description of the suspect driving the car that struck the victim's car. At the scheduled Preliminary Hearing after negotiations all charges were dismissed.
  • Marinaro Law Firm represented A.G., in a Summary trial for the offense of Retail Theft. Prior to trial, the firm successfully negotiated the withdrawal of the charge in exchange for her agreement to perform community service and the payment of court costs. once A.G. finishes these items, she will earn the dismissal of the charge. A.G. will be able to expunge this "black mark" from her record due to the dismissal of the charge.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented F.L. in a criminal case. F.L. was charged with reporting to an officer that he was attacked by a co-worker. The officer investigated the incident by interviewing several individuals (3) and deemed that the report was false. All witnesses appeared at the scheduled preliminary hearing. Attorney Marinaro negotiated to have the prosecution withdraw the False Report (M-2). Client remains without a criminal record. Dismissed. Case closed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented the defendant in a scheduled PFA hearing. Following testimony by the Plaintiff and Defendant the Court determined that Plaintiff failed to meet her burden and the Temporary PFA Order was Dismissed. Julian J. was accused of heinous crimes against the Plaintiff including rape. Attorney Marinaro discredited the Plaintiff's testimony through a rigorous cross-examination. PFA action Dismissed.
  • Marinaro Law represented the defendant in a summary trial before the Court of Common Pleas. M.J. had previously been convicted of harassment by the Magisterial District Judge. Following the appeal and a contested trial, the Court found that the Commonwealth did not prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt and dismissed the charge against our client. Not Guilty.
  • Charges dismissed following testimony by Commonwealth witnesses. Attorney Marinaro represented the defendant in a Simple Assault (M-2) charge. C.M. was accused of physically assaulting the alleged victim by pushing the victim's face into the floor several times; smashing the victim's face into the floor; and strangling the victim making it difficult to breathe. The victim escaped by running to the neighbor's house and calling 911. The victim was transported by ambulance to LGH for treatment. Following testimony by the alleged victim and arresting officer all charges were dismissed. NOT GUILTY.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented his client following an arrest for Aggravated Assault (F-1) and Recklessly Endangering (M-2). S.A.M. was accused of causing serious bodily injury to his ex-girlfriend. The police aver that S.A.M. dragged the victim from his moving automobile. The alleged victim eventually fell from the car striking her head causing loss of consciousness. Defendant fled the scene and never made an attempt to stop the car. The victim was transported to Lancaster General Hospital by the emergency medical services for head trauma. Client avoids potential state incarceration when all of the charges were Dismissed at the Preliminary Hearing.
  • Defendant, T.M., was charged with Terroristic Threats, Disorderly Conduct, and Resisting Arrest. Attorney Marinaro represented the defendant before the local Magisterial District Justice and all three (3) criminal offenses were Dismissed. NOT GUILTY.
  • Marinaro represented RR for charges whereby he was accused of causing a public inconvenience, annoyance/alarm, or recklessly created a risk to another. The State Police Trooper who filed the charges testified and was cross-examined. Following the hearing, all charges were Dismissed. NOT GUILTY.
  • Marinaro represented C.M. (18 years old) for the charges of a Home Invasion Robbery (F) and Conspiracy to commit Robbery (F) where a knife and a baseball bat were used to inflict bodily injury upon the victim. All of the charges were Dismissed. NOT GUILTY.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented Evelyn G. before Magisterial District Judge C. Hartmann. She was charged with 3 counts of Aggravated Assault (F-1) by the Lancaster City Bureau of Police. All charges were Dismissed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented R.B. for Simple Assault (M-2) before Magisterial District Judge Joshua R. Keller; all charges were Dismissed. NOT GUILTY.
  • On the same day, Attorney Marinaro represented WR for Terroristic Threats with the Intent to Terrorize another person (M1) before Magisterial District Judge Janice Jimenez; all charges were Dismissed.
  • Marinaro represented KLS who was charged with simple assault and terroristic threats toward a 12 year-old male. After a preliminary hearing where the 12 year-old testified that he was assaulted and threatened by KLS the court dismissed all charges. Marinaro presented a clear cut alibi defense. Dismissed!


  • Criminal Trespassing into Family Home (F-2). Attorney Marinaro represented client for the Felony Offense when he entered into a home via the 1st floor kitchen window. Marinaro negotiated with the ADA to drop the Felony 2 charge to a Misdemeanor 3. Additionally, the client shall apply for ARD for the M3 Trespass. Once ARD is successfully completed our client may file for an expungement of charge. F-2 REDUCED to M-3.
  • Felony Offense-Cocaine (2.7 grams) was reduced to Possession of Cocaine — Misdemeanor. Attorney Marinaro successfully negotiated a Felony Drug Offense to a Misdemeanor Possession. Client avoids incarceration and a Felony conviction.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented D.R. for Driving With a Suspended License DUI related 1543 (b); following negotiations, client plead guilty to Driving without a License 1501 and was fined $200.00. Client avoids mandatory 60 days in LCP, $1,000 fine, and additional 1 year license suspension. Excellent result.
  • Burglary of Home — Attorney Marinaro represented J. L. for the charges of Burglary (F-1); Criminal Trespass (F-2); Theft by Unlawful Taking (M-3); and Criminal Mischief. Our client forced his way into the front door of the victim's residence and stole various personal property. During the commission of the crime, the Victim/Owner of the home entered the residence. Client jumped out a window and fled on foot. Attorney Marinaro's client had six misdemeanor prior convictions, however through successful negotiations he avoided a State Prison Guideline Sentence. He was sentenced to 9 to 23 months incarceration, to be served in the Dauphin County Prison. Defendant was granted immediate work-release. The Criminal Trespass (F-2) and Theft charges were withdrawn by the Commonwealth. Client avoids State Prison and is granted immediate work-release.
  • Client charged with six (6) violations of the Crimes Code and Motor Vehicle Code following a vehicle accident on Route 30. Marinaro Law negotiated a resolution to the case at the Preliminary Hearing. Client pled guilty to one (1) offense at the Preliminary Hearing, which greatly reduced his exposure to additional penalties on the dismissed offenses. Case closed.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented client following a charge of 75 - 1543(b)(1); Driving with Suspended License because of a prior DUI. Client was facing Mandatory 60 days in jail with discretionary jail time up to 90 days. Furthermore, his license would be revoked for an additional 2 years. Marinaro negotiated the charge down to a 75 - 1501(a): Driving Without a Valid License. The successful negotiation resulted in the client not going to jail and having no additional license suspension.
  • Q.H. was initially charged with Burglary/Criminal Attempt, Criminal Conspiracy to commit Burglary and Possess instrument of a Crime. Q.H and his two (2) co-defendants attempted to enter the Bon Ton Department Store at the Park City Center during the early morning hours. Attorney Marinaro negotiated to reduce the crime to Attempted Criminal Trespass. Q.H was in possession of instruments of crime, namely, two (2) crow bars, latex gloves, CPS unit and a wig. All three Defendant's were from the Baltimore City area. Marinaro's client Q.H. had an extensive criminal record (Refel) — he was sentenced to SCI and made eligible for boot camp. Supervision was transferred to client's home state of Maryland. Boot camp was an excellent result for this particular client.
  • E. C. was charged with three (3) counts of delivery of Heroin and Cocaine. The State Attorney General disbanded a six-figure heroin operation by charging 11 suspects. It was reported that the network was bold in their trade, stashing packages in cars and trash cans, and openly selling on multiple city blocks. It was averred it was a "24/7" operation that profited more than half-million dollars in the past year alone. Attorney Marinaro represented E.C. during an open court plea. Following presentation, client was sentenced to a time-served sentence in the Lancaster County Prison (10 months).
  • I.R. was charged with one (1) count of Possession of a Controlled Substance, graded as an Ungraded Misdemeanor (M) for unlawfully possessing synthetic marijuana and one (1) count of Possession of a Controlled Substance (M) — eleven (11) prescription pills without a valid prescription. I.R. was facing up to two (2) years in prison for these charges. Further, if convicted, our client was also facing a two (2) year license suspension. Marinaro Law negotiated a resolution at the Preliminary Hearing for a guilty plea to one (1) count of Possession of Paraphernalia. The sentence for his plea was a $100.00 fine.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented L.W.H. for a Parole/Probation Violation. L.H. violated probation by showing up for a scheduled parole meeting with alcohol on his breath. The appointment with the Parole Officer was in the afternoon and Client admitted to "drinking last night." Client's BAC was 0.58%. Client is on probation for three (3) separate DUI offenses. The Probation Office recommended 6 months in jail. After Argument, the Court sentenced L.T. to Time Served (45 days) and release on the scram bracelet for 6 months.
  • M.F. was charged with assaulting the victim with a baseball bat causing Bone Fractures to his legs and arms. Following negotiations at the Preliminary Hearing, Michael Marinaro persuaded the prosecution to reduce the Felony-Aggravated Assault charge to a Misdemeanor-Simple Assault count. M.F. was placed on probation for 2 years.
  • Client was charged with Felony Possession with Intent to Distribute a large quantity of Cocaine and doing so within 1,000 feet of a school. The school zone carries a mandatory 2 year sentence in the State Correctional Institution. The government alleged our client was a passenger in a car when an undercover police officer entered the car to purchase the drugs from the driver. The driver handed the money to our client, who was seated in the front passenger seat. Attorney Marinaro negotiated for our client to plead no contest, no admission, no jail time.
  • Marinaro Law Firm successfully represented L.D. in a dependency action. L.D. was involved in a dependency action as a result of the alleged sexual assault of her daughter at her residence. The firm was able to secure the return of the child to her residence in a period of four (4) months. This result was achieved as a result of Marinaro Law's advocacy for L.D.!
  • Marinaro Law represented J.O. in a criminal matter. J.O. was charged with two (2) counts of Simple Assault for placing a shotgun in his girlfriend's face during an argument. Further, J.O. was charged with one (1) count of Indirect Criminal Contempt. In a negotiated resolution, the firm was able to eliminate J.O.'s exposure to a prison sentence. In fact, Marinaro Law negotiated the dismissal of the Indirect Criminal Contempt charge. J.O. was sentenced to only two (2) years of probation, rather than looking at a lengthy prison sentence. Another great result for the Marinaro Law Firm!
  • Marinaro Law obtained a truly amazing result for T.H. in a traffic case. T.H. was charged with his thirteenth (13th) violation of Driving While Operated Privileges were Suspended. T.H. was facing a mandatory sentence of thirty (30) days of jail and a one (1) year suspension of his driver's license. The firm was able to negotiate a resolution of T.H.'s charges that involved no mandatory jail sentence nor one (1) year suspension of his driver's license. The Marinaro Law Firm getting results!
  • J.F. was charged with one (1) count of Identity Theft, graded as a Felony of the Third Degree and one (1) count of Access Device Fraud, also graded as a Felony of the Third Degree. Marinaro Law negotiated with the Commonwealth to reduce the charges to a Misdemeanor. Further, we negotiated a sentence of only one (1) year probation for both counts.
  • E.M. was charged with one (1) count of Retail Theft, graded as a Misdemeanor of the First Degree. The theft was various items from Kohl's store in Park City Center. E.M. is employed in a management position in a large, local department company. In order to prevent E.M. from having a criminal record, which may have impacted his management position, Marinaro Law successfully negotiated a plea to one (1) count of Disorderly Conduct, graded as a Summary Offense. E.M. was extremely happy with this resolution of his criminal case.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented J.J. after she was charged with possession of heroin after police watched her make a buy. After aggressive negotiation, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the charge to disorderly conduct (no jail time or fine).
  • Attorney Marinaro represented client in numerous Felony charges of embezzlement. Client stole approximately $200,000.00 and reimbursed the victim about $60,000.00. Restitution remains at $122,769.00. Attorney Marinaro negotiated a sentence for his client to serve one (1) year on HOUSE ARREST.
  • Aggravated Assault (F-1) reduced to Simple Assault (M-2). Attorney Marinaro represented W.A.J. in an aggravated assault felony case. After aggressive negotiation with the prosecutor, he agreed to dismiss the aggravated assault felony count for a guilty plea to simple assault. Client avoids Felon status.
  • Marinaro Law represented T.B. in a criminal matter. T.B. was charged with various criminal offenses for holding a handgun to his daughter's head, including but not limited to Terroristic Threats, graded as a Misdemeanor of the First Degree. The firm successfully resolved T.B.'s case at the Preliminary Hearing for a negotiated probationary plea of three (3) years, which can be reduced to two (2) years if he follows the terms of probation. Further, Marinaro Law Firm successfully reduced his bail from $500,00.00 to unsecured bail to ensure T.B.'s release from jail.
  • Marinaro Law represented J.B. in a criminal case. At the time of the offense, J.B. was using heroin, which made her desperate for money. In an attempt to support her habit, J.B. ripped a Kindle Fire out of the hands of the victim on the street. J.B. ran from the scene, but was subsequently arrested and charged with Robbery. Marinaro Law successfully negotiated J.B. a reduction of the charges and probationary sentence. Prior to negotiations, J.B. was more than likely looking at a lengthy prison sentence.
  • M.F. was stopped for a traffic violation. During the vehicle stop, client provided the officer with a false name. Client was subsequently arrested for DUI, providing a false ID, and related offenses. Attorney Marinaro filed a pretrial motion challenging the sufficiency of the DUI charge. Before the bench trial, the DUI was dismissed. Client plead guilty to false ID.
  • Attorney Marinaro saves client from serving years of incarceration. Defendant, J.K., faced state guidelines of 36-54 months incarceration for the Aggravated Assault charge alone. Following negotiations defendant was sentenced to serve 9 months incarceration in the Lancaster County Prison, a far cry from a state prison sentence he was facing. Attorney Marinaro represented Jesse K in a major aggravated assault case in which he repeatedly punched the victim in the face while he was sleeping, causing multiple facial fractures requiring intense trauma care. Theoretically, Jessie should be serving years behind bars in the state prison system. Client is very thankful for the firm's successful negotiations regarding his case.
  • D.R. while shopping in a department store did transfer an original box of shoes valued at $49.95 into the box of another pair of shoes valued at $17.47. D.R. then paid the lower value and exited the store. The loss was a mere $32.48, however this was the defendant's 2nd Retail Theft. Attorney Marinaro negotiated with the Assistant District Attorney and the arresting officer for the defendant to plead to a Summary Offense only.
  • A.P. was charged with stealing jewelry valued at $340.00 from Boscov's. This was A.G.'s second retail theft. Attorney Marinaro represented A.P. and negotiated a plea to a Summary (S) Offense with no probation. Excellent result for this client.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented a client who was charged with a DUI while causing an accident. Client had a high blood alcohol level and was facing jail time. After showing the client's version of what happened and pointing out mitigating factors, Marinaro was able to achieve a no jail resolution for the client.
  • I.V. was charged with 2 counts of Theft from a Motor Vehicle; 2 counts of Criminal Conspiracy; and 1 count of Receiving Stolen Property. The aforementioned charges were graded as Misdemeanors of the First Degree (M-1). Marinaro Law Firm successfully negotiated a resolution of the charges at the magisterial District Judge Level in exchange for plea to only 1 count of Criminal Mischief (M-3). The resolution allowed the Defendant to not only have a Theft charge removed from his record which most likely would interfere with his present and future employment opportunities, but resolved the matter before the case proceeded to the Court of Common Pleas.
  • In CW vs. N.S., Attorney Marinaro represented N.S. in a second offense DUI Matter. N.S. was observed crossing the double yellow line three times with the driver's side tires. N.S. submitted to a Drug Evaluation conducted by a Drug Recognition Expert with the PA State Police. According to the expert he was under the influence of marijuana. Furthermore, N.S., submitted a blood sample that contained 2.4 ng/mL Delta-9 THC and 26 ng/mL Delta-9 carboxy THC, both of which are above the limit. Following review of discovery, Marinaro negotiated to have N.S. serve 5 days of incarceration, followed by 6 months probation. This DUI called for a mandatory minimum sentence of 90 days incarceration, followed by 5 years of probation. The sentence was a significant departure from the mandatory minimum sentence in both jail and probation.
  • Marinaro Law Firm represented L.M. in a criminal case. L.M. was charged with Criminal Mischief, graded as a misdemeanor and Accidents Involving damage to Unattended Vehicles or Property, graded as a summary offense. As a result of Marinaro Law Firm negotiations with the Commonwealth, the charge of Criminal Mischief was withdrawn with the payment of full restitution. Further, the firm successfully negotiated a fine only for the summary charge, which is punishable by up to ninety (90) days in jail.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented N.W. in the criminal charge of Theft (M-1: value of property $2,000 to $25,000.) N.W. was extradited from the state of Florida to face the said charge and his bail was set at $100,000.00. Attorney Marinaro negotiated for the defendant to plead guilty to a M-3 charge and pay restitution of $770.56 to the victim. Our client was immediately released from prison and his family transported him back to his home state.
  • Defendant was charged with stealing Christmas packages that had been delivered to area homes. During the investigation, police found more than 1,000 items at the defendant's home that they believed to be stolen. Marinaro Law litigated the matter and P.A.B. was found to be guilty of 36 charges from the original 99. Attorney Michael Marinaro represented P.A.B. for her sentencing. Our client was sentenced to 6 months of House Arrest, followed by 2 1/2 years of probation. District Attorney Craig Stedman said after the sentencing that "the impact of her crimes on these victims was far greater than the monetary value, we believed these facts clearly warranted incarceration. We requested consecutive sentences in the aggravated range to no avail, as the judge felt differently. There can be no doubt that the Defendant is happy."
  • Kirby Kopp was charged with spanking his wife with a spoon on multiple occasions. The Commonwealth filed charges of Stalking; Simple Assault; and Harassment. Prior to selecting the jury for trial, Kopp rejected Marinaro Law Firm's negotiated offer from the Commonwealth which would have dismissed the charges against him. Marinaro Law negotiated to have all of the foregoing criminal charges dismissed if Kirby Kopp would have agreed to enter into a three year Civil Protection From Abuse (PFA) order. The matter proceeded to trial. Following the close of the evidence, the presiding judge dismissed the Simple Assault charge on the firm's motion for a directed verdict. The jury returned a verdict of guilty on the remaining charges. Following an article in the local paper, the news of the verdict went worldwide with newspapers and television stations picking up the story based on the unusual facts involving a husband disciplining his wife by spanking her with a wood spoon. Marinaro Law will file a Post-Sentencing Motion and an appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented T.H. in an illegal drug possession case. Despite being caught with Cocaine (1 gram), OxyContin (60 tablets), heroin (2 bags), and marijuana, Attorney Marinaro negotiated to have his client plead guilty at the Preliminary Hearing for probation. Case closed at Preliminary Hearing Level.
  • Attorney Marinaro's client entered into open guilty pleas to twenty-five (25) counts of Burglary and related counts of criminal attempt, criminal conspiracy, and theft by unlawful taking. The court accepted Jenkins' plea. After receiving evidence and argument by the Prosecution and Marinaro, the court sentenced Justin to an aggregate term of time-served (319 days) to twenty-three (23) months' imprisonment, followed by eight (8) years' of probation. The Commonwealth appealed the court's sentence claiming that the court "imposed an excessively lenient sentence," and that the court "depreciated both the gravity of the burglaries and the need to protect the community." On appeal the Commonwealth asserted Jenkins faced a maximum penalty of nine-hundred and ten (910) years' incarceration. The trial court evaluated all relevant sentencing considerations while putting the same on the record. Following oral argument the Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence.
  • Marinaro Law represented N.R. in a probation/parole violation hearing. Despite having 2 previous violations of his probation/parole, the firm successfully argued that N.R. should be released on a Time-Served sentence. The judge agreed with Marinaro Law in that N.R. is amenable to treatment and not a threat to the community.
  • Marinaro Law represented J.M. in a Retail Theft matter. Despite being charged with a second offense Retail Theft offense, graded as a M-1, the firm successfully negotiated the charge down to a Summary Offense. With his skillful negotiations, Marinaro Law changed J.M.'s potential sentence from a maximum of 5 years' incarceration down to a $300.00 fine.
  • Attorney Marinaro negotiated to reduce charges from M-1 to M-3; case settled at the Preliminary Hearing level; Client pays restitution, fine, cost; no probation was ordered by the court. Defendant was charged with Theft by Unlawful Taking (M-1). Our client obtained property after placing a winning bid at an auction. After receiving the moveable property A.M.H. fled the scene with the property, failing to pay the auctioneers. Case closed at the preliminary hearing; charges successfully reduced; no probation for client.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented the defendant in an Aggravated Assault (F-2) matter. J.P.P. stabbed the victim with a knife during a fight. The prosecution was prepared to present the testimony of the victim, as well as three eye witnesses to the said assault. Moreover, J.P.P. was covered with the victim's blood when interviewed by the police. The guidelines called for a term of 9-16 months incarceration. The defendant entered into an open court guilty plea and was sentenced to probation only.
  • Marinaro Law Firm represented J.G. in a criminal matter involving drugs. In an open plea, the defendant pled guilty to the following offenses: PWID - Marijuana (Felony); Criminal Conspiracy to PWID (F); Possession of Cocaine (4.5 grams); and Possession of drug paraphernalia. The Court agreed with Marinaro Law that the appropriate sentence would be a TIME-SERVED SENTENCE. J.G. had been previously incarcerated for about 4 months in the Lancaster County Prison.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented M.T. in a criminal matter, M.T. was charged with stealing $212.98 worth of property from Boscov's Department Store. The Retail Theft charge is graded as a Misdemeanor 1, which may carry up to 5 years incarceration and a $10,000 fine. Marinaro negotiated for his client to plead guilty at the Preliminary Hearing to a Summary (S) charge. The guilty plea to the Summary (S) offense required no supervised probation and a $50.00 fine.
  • Marinaro Law represented D.M. in a criminal matter in which he was charged with multiple counts of Simple Assault (Domestic Violence), Terroristic Threats (Domestic Violence), and two (2) counts of Indirect Criminal Contempt for violating an existing protection from abuse order. In a negotiated guilty plea, the firm successfully negotiated a plea of six (6) months to twenty-three (23) months incarceration. Due to D.M.'s prior record score, D.M. was looking at a sentence in a State Correctional Institution.
  • Following negotiations, Marinaro Law persuaded the District Attorney's Office to reduce the DUI offense to a Public Drunkenness (Summary Offense). KF was operating his Honda Civic when he was pulled over by the Northwest Regional Police Department. His eyes were dilated and he appeared paranoid to the arresting officer. KF stated that he ingested a substance from a container marked "pump I." The container was located in the car. A Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) employed by the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) reported that the Defendant was under the influence of Bath Salts and a Nerve Stimulant. The firm successfully argued to reduce the DUI charge to Public Drunkenness, a summary charge. This would have been the defendant's 2nd conviction for DUI in 10 years. KF avoided at least 90 days in jail, an 18 month license suspension and 5 years of probation, at least a $1,500.00 minimum fine, mandatory 1 year ignition interlock requirement and numerous classes regarding highway safety and drug/alcohol prevention.
  • Marinaro represents R.K. in robbery of the Susquehanna Bank. (Lancaster Intelligencer-new era/ Marinaro represented 21 year-old RK for the charges of robbing a Bank. RK's description was clearly provided by the bank teller and the defendant was arrested shortly after taking only $1,055.00 in US currency. RK was in the bank on 3 separate occasions and 4th visit he handed the teller a note which indicated he had a gun and wanted all the money. The teller obeyed the demand by emptying his top drawer. Some of the money given to RK included "bait money" with an electronic tracking device. Subsequently, RK was arrested and confessed. Following an open court guilty plea in which Marinaro presented several character witnesses the court sentenced the defendant to 1 year less 1 day to 2 years less 1 day, followed by 3 years probation. This sentence was exceptional considering RK robbed a Federally Insured Bank Marinaro represented DC for Stalking (M-1) and Simple Assault (M-2) (4 Counts). The Commonwealth provided notice of intent to offer evidence of prior bad acts pursuant to Rule 404(b). DC was previously convicted 8 times. The Commonwealth's intent was to introduce to the jury several assaults (2) in which DC was convicted of previously assaulting the same victim in the instant matter by strangulation; suffocation; etc. Through negotiations DC was sentenced to 3 months incarceration followed by 6 months house arrest and years of supervision. By accepting the negotiated sentence, DC avoided a certain sentence that called for years of incarceration in a state prison facility.
  • Attorney Marinaro represented EW for Simple Assault (M-2). EW shoved AT's head into a wall repeatedly causing visible injuries that were photographed by the police. EW was arrested for a Parole Violation because of the new charges. Marinaro negotiated for a Harassment (S) summary offense to secure his client's released from prison and a withdrawal of the parole violation.
  • Marinaro represented MM for a DUI with a BAC reading of .193%. MM was denied ARD because he was not a US citizen and failed to have a valid US drivers license. The defendant entered into an open court plea of guilty. Marinaro presented several character witnesses on behalf of MM, including his employers. The court sentenced MM to a term of 14 days House Arrest. Counsels request for House Arrest was to avoid immigration consequences for his client should he have been incarcerated in the Lancaster County Prison.
  • Marinaro Law Firm represented AM before the court for a parole violation in which she was found to be in possession of firearms and other contraband in her residence. Following a hearing the court terminated parole/probation. AM was to have approximately two more years of supervision.
  • Marinaro Law represented Lino M. for a parole violation. LM was charged with new Felony offenses in Chester County. The court granted counsel's request for a time served sentence.
  • Sentence of 6 months incarceration for Robbery offense in which a shotgun was discharged at the victim. Attorney Marinaro represented MH for Robbery (F-1), Robbery (F-1), Criminal Attempt-Robbery (F-1), 2 Counts of Criminal Conspiracy to Robbery (F-1), and Robbery (F-2). MH was involved in a robbery of several individuals. MH drove his accomplices to a residence in Little Britain Township to commit the robbery. MH's co-defendant exited the car with shotgun. The robbery went south and MH's co-defendant discharged the gun in the direction of the victim. Marinaro negotiated to have 4 of the 6 Felony counts withdrawn by the District Attorney. Furthermore, the 2 Felony charges MH plead guilty to were reduced from a grading of F- 1 to F-2, thus lowering his incarceration exposure. MH plead guilty to Robbery (F-2) and Criminal Conspiracy (F-2), crimes in which a shotgun was discharged at the victim during its commission. Following an open court plea, the court sentenced MH to serve 6 to 23 months, followed by 3 years probation. MH was made eligible for immediate work release.
  • AF and BR were both charged with Retail Theft (M-2). Marinaro Law represented the aforementioned individuals at a Preliminary Hearing and negotiated a plea to one count each of Disorderly Conduct (S).
  • Marinaro represents J.J. who was Sentenced to Time Served for committing 20+ Burglaries. The Commonwealth was seeking a sentence of at least 10 years in prison for burglaries JJ committed last year in Lancaster. JJ spent about 10 months at the Lancaster County Prison between December 2011 and September 2012. Following a lengthy hearing the court sentenced JJ to time served. The court was well aware of the personal difficulties JJ had as a child. JJ previously testified as a victim in an unrelated criminal matter before the sentencing Judge. Rather than 10 years of incarceration, JJ was sentenced to approximately 10 months followed by numerous years of supervision.
  • JJ had been locked up at the Lancaster County Prison for 10 months, charged with 25 burglaries and seven attempted break-ins. The 19 year old Lancaster City man was facing maximum prison penalties of 1,000 plus years of incarceration on the 59 combined counts, according to his attorney, Michael V. Marinaro. JJ pled guilty and was prepared to be sentenced. The prosecution was not prepared to proceed with sentencing by not notifying the burglary victims. The court ordered JJ released on unsecured bail.
  • Marinaro represents S.H. in a first-degree murder trial. S.H. was not convicted of first-degree murder or third-degree murder, however he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter. A Lancaster County jury convicted a 28-year-old man of voluntary manslaughter for the 2009 stabbing death of CJG. Voluntary manslaughter is a lesser degree of homicide, often referred to as "imperfect self-defense." Prosecutors sought a first-degree murder conviction, which carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole. Defense Attorney Michael V. Marinaro asked for an outright acquittal, arguing that CJG threw a "vicious punch" at his client before SH responded with lethal force. CJG, 20, was stabbed in the neck and bled to death, a doctor testified. While SH showed no physical reaction to the verdict, about a dozen deputy sheriffs escorted supporters for both the defendant and the victim from the courthouse. Many of the supporters on both sides were visibly upset and reacted vocally. The courtroom was packed with spectators throughout the trial. Both attorneys agreed the key to the case was a video recording of the stabbing on Marietta Avenue and what led to it. In the video, CJG is clearly seen throwing a punch before SH used the knife. The trial lasted 4 days, with prosecutors calling more than a dozen witnesses, including 3 eyewitnesses. Marinaro called several witnesses, including SH, who testified for 90 minutes. Both attorneys delivered closing arguments Thursday morning. The jury returned with the verdict after 5 hours of deliberation. Attorney Marinaro said his client acted in self-defense. "Mr. S.H. should walk free and clear from all the charges," he told the jurors. Marinaro focused on that first punch. "That was a vicious punch," Marinaro said. "This man, C.J.G., was a specimen. He was solid and could do damage." Guilty of voluntary manslaughter. NOT GUILTY of Third-Degree murder; NOT GUILTY of First-Degree murder! (Client avoids life sentence without possibility of parole.)
  • Defendant, E.M., was charged by the Lancaster City Bureau of Police with 14 Felony counts related to Owning, and Operating and a Chop Shop. Attorney Marinaro negotiated to have 12 of the 14 Felonies withdrawn. Defendant plead guilty, Nolo Contendere, and was sentenced to 3 years probation. Marinaro requested the court to transfer his clients probation to the Bronx, New York. E.M. owned a business named Lamona Auto Sales, located at 2360 Washington Avenue, Bronx, NY. Defendant stated to the police that he purchased numerous vehicles from insurance auctions and repaired them to be sold for profit. The vehicles had vehicle identification numbers (VIN) that were destroyed/altered. Additionally, several vehicles possessed parts from vehicles that were reported stolen. Considering the facts and complexity of this crime which involved detailed investigations by experienced auto theft and insurance fraud detectives, three (3) years probation was an excellent outcome.


•  ARD acceptance for Criminal Attempt Burglary (F-1), Criminal Attempt Trespass (F-3), Loitering and Prowling at Night (M-3), and Public Drunkenness (S). Based on extenuating circumstances and after facing the District Attorneys' ARD Panel, Kent Nugent, from Ontario, Canada, was accepted into the ARD Program.

  • C.G. was charged with THEFT and entered into the ARD program and received 18 months probation. Upon completion of probation, C.F.'s record will be expunged.
  • K.D. and G.D. were charged with Interference with Custody of a Child, a Felony of the Third Degree, punishable by up to 7 years in jail and a 15K fine. Attorney Marinaro represented both clients and negotiated for them to be admitted into the ARD program. As represented by counsel, both K.D. and G.D. were excellent candidates for the ARD program. Upon completion of the program the felony charges shall be Expunged.
  • Commonwealth vs. S.S.; Marinaro Law Firm represented S.S. in a criminal matter. S.S. was charged on four (4) separate dockets with multiple counts of retail theft, receiving stolen property and criminal trespass. In a global offer, the firm negotiated with the prosecution for S.S. admission into the Drug Court Program. If client completes the Drug Court Program, she will earn the DISMISSAL of all of her charges and avoid a criminal record.
  • Marinaro Law Firm represented WC for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). This was WC's third arrest for DUI in the span of thirty (30) years. At the time of his arrest, WC had a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) of 0.25%. The firm successfully represented the client before the High BAC panel of the Office of the District Attorney, which resulted in his recommendation and acceptance by the court in to the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) program.
  • Marinaro represented Tony S in a DUI matter. TS faced the Lancaster County District Attorney's Accelerated Rehabilitation Disposition (ARD) Panel. TS was well prepared for questioning and was accepted into the ARD program. TS's BAC was .262%.


  • Marinaro Law Firm represented L.G. in a complex divorce proceeding. Following a weeklong Master's Hearing, our firm obtained a decision from the Master for his client in the amount of approximately $1,000,000.00. The said amount constituted 79% of the marital estate.


  • Attorney Hagy represented S.H. in a custody hearing and prevailed in obtaining sole legal and sole physical custody. The opposing party went into hiding with the child. Attorney Hagy worked with the client and law enforcement to locate the child and obtain custody. The other party now faces felony criminal charges for Interference with Custody of Children, and must petition the court before having any custody right to the child.
  • Attorney Hagy represented Z.G. in a custody matter where he started the case with no custodial time, and Attorney Hagy was successful in obtaining a shared custody schedule for the client.
  • Attorney Hagy represented C.H. in a custody matter where he started the case with partial custodial periods with the child. Attorney Hagy successfully obtained primary physical custody for the client.
  • Marinaro Law represented M.G. in a custody matter. Following the conclusion of a one day custody hearing, the parties settled under terms that doubled M.G.'s custodial time with his children.
  • Marinaro Law successfully negotiated our client, T.A., the equivalent of primary custody. Under a negotiated resolution, T.A. has custody of his Daughter every weekday from 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Further, T.A. has custody every other weekend from Friday until Sunday and overnights on Tuesday and Thursday evenings. As a result of the firms efforts, T.A. has contact with his Daughter on 24 of 30 days each month. Marinaro Lw Firm again shattered the stereotype that Fathers cannot obtain significant custodial time with their children in custody litigation.
  • Client retains Attorney Marinaro following a friend's recommendation after a "not so great experience with another Lancaster County attorney," in which she lost Primary Physical Custody of her infant child. After several difficult hearings the court issued an Order granting our client primary physical custody of the party's child based upon the statutory analysis of 16 factors. J.S. (client) was very pleased with our representation and stated she "would not trust any other Lancaster County Attorney with a child custody matter." This was a very difficult case, however, the court was presented with testimony from an excellent mother and rightly granted her primary physical custody of her young child.
  • Marinaro Law represented B.F., Plaintiff-Father in custody matter. In a Family Business Court proceeding, the firm successfully convinced the Judge that Primary Physical Custody should switch from Defendant-Mother to Plaintiff-Father because of the unsafe conditions at her residence. Further, the Court ordered that the child change school districts. Defendant-Mother went from primary custody to partial physical custody, without any overnights.
  • Marinaro Law Firm had a very successful outcome in a custody matter. Following the removal of her children by J.W., N.D. retained the services of Marinaro Law Firm to obtain the return of her custodial rights. After calling two (2) witnesses at the custody hearing, J.W. agreed to settle to terms proposed by Marinaro Law Law prior to the hearing. The positive outcome in the matter was attributed to the aggressive representation of Marinaro Law during the hearing.
  • Attorney Marinaro obtains Custody Special Relief Court Order for Mother of two children after Father flees with children to housing project in Brooklyn, New York. On February 24, 2013, Father unilaterally removed Children from their home in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Mother notified the Lancaster City Bureau of Police of Father's irrational, momentary whim decision to flee to New York City. The Lancaster Police were unable to assist based on jurisdiction problems. Father refused to respond to Mother's phone calls and avoided her when she traveled to Brooklyn seeking the return of the children. NYC Police would not get involved in the matter. Attorney Marinaro obtained a court order directing the Police in any jurisdiction including New York City to assist Mother in obtaining custody of the subject children. Shortly after the issuing of the court order, Mother was reunited with her children. Currently, Mother has sole legal and sole physical custody of the children.
  • Marinaro litigates custody matter for Father who was seeking primary physical custody of his 2 children. Following several days of testimony, the court granted Marinaro's request and reversed primary physical custody of the 2 subject children from Mother to Father. Following a contentious hearing, the court agreed that Marinaro's client was in better position to provide care for the children on a routine basis. Through testimony the court determined that Father was in a better position to provide for the stability and continuity of the education, family and community life of children, SR and OR. The findings and order of the court pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. 5328(a) completely reversed primary physical custody of the party's children from Mother (SM) to Father (LR).


  • D.H. vs. W.H.,  Marinaro Law Firm represented D.H. in a spousal support case at the Lancaster County Office of Domestic Relations. After separating from her Husband, D.H. sought the income to allow her to live independently of her spouse. Based on his experience and knowledge of the domestic relations system, our firm was able to secure an award of $2,200.00 a month in spousal support for his client.


  • Our Law Firm represented J.H. in a de novo support appeal hearing before the Court of Common Pleas. As a result of the hearing, J.H.'s child support obligation was significantly lowered based upon his unemployment compensation and support obligations to another child. The court used the Defendant's previous income when she was discharged from the United States Air Force under general conditions. J.H.'s support obligation was lowered by over two-hundred dollars a month.
  • Marinaro Law Firm represented J.H. in a support appeal from a Domestic Relations Order. Plaintiff failed to appear at the hearing. The Plaintiff also failed to provide financial information at the previous child support conference. Due to Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's directives to appear and provide financial information, upon motion by our firm, J.H.'s child support will be suspended until the next proceeding.


  • Matinaro Law Firm successfully defended Preliminary Objections in the aforementioned civil case. The case involves damages to G.N.'s vehicle from a natural gas explosion in Millersville, Pennsylvania. Defendant, UGI Utilities filed a motion to strike a paragraph of G.N.'s complaint. the firm successfully argued that the paragraph was proper under the Rules of Civil Procedure.


  • Attorney Marinaro represented C.J. in a physical abuse action filed on behalf of his 10 year-old child. The defendant was the child's mother, A.J. Following several days of testimony court agreed with Attorney Marinaro that an Order to protect the child was warranted. A.J./Mother physically abused her son by striking him in the head. The child needed medical attention at LGH. Additionally, the court heard from the Children & Youth Agency and viewed a video/audio interview of the child regarding the abuse. Furthermore, the 10 year-old child testified in chambers. PFA order granted to protect child.
  • N.A. vs. M.K., Marinaro Law Firm successfully defended a male client against the imposition of a Final PFA Order. Following the close of the Plaintiff's case, Marinaro Law orally moved for the dismissal of the matter. The Court agreed and the matter was dismissed. The dismissal occurred even before our client presented any evidence! NOT GUILTY.
  • Marinaro represents TC in a PFA matter versus his former girlfriend, TW. A hearing was held before the court and Plaintiff, TC, was granted a Final Protection from Abuse Order.