Case Results & Past Examples
Real matters we’ve handled, summarized to illustrate strategy and outcomes. Every case is different. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
All Charges Dismissed Before Jury Trial (2022)
Background
In 2022, following a single-vehicle crash involving a Honda Accord exiting I-270 in Gaithersburg, our client was charged with DUI, DWI, reckless driving, and negligent driving. Emergency medical personnel arrived first and transported the client; police arrived later. Notably, no witness—neither police nor medics—reported seeing the client inside the vehicle, and both the driver- and passenger-side doors were open.
When this 27‑year‑old single mother was searching for a “DWI lawyer in Montgomery County, Maryland”, she chose Hadden & Moschkin and attorney Christopher Moschkin, a seasoned DUI defense lawyer. In this case—where the State could not prove who was driving—the charges were ultimately dismissed.
Defense Focus
- Operation not observed: No witness placed the client behind the wheel.
- Open-door evidence: Both front doors open suggested more than one person present.
- Alternative-driver theory: Another individual may have been driving and fled on foot before officers arrived.
- Intoxication ≠ identity: The State must prove who was driving beyond a reasonable doubt.
Outcome
The case was dismissed in its entirety by the State on the trial date. No fines, no points, no probation, and no costs were assessed. Legal fees totaled approximately $5,000.
All Charges Dismissed After Expert Testimony Excluded (2024)
Background
In 2024, a 28-year-old client was charged with DUI and related offenses after totaling his Honda Accord on an I-270 off-ramp. He had taken prescription medication and consumed alcohol before the crash. After failing field sobriety tests, he was transported to Suburban Hospital in Bethesda, where his blood plasma showed alcohol (ethanol) levels rather than whole-blood BAC.
Defense Focus
- Plasma vs. whole-blood distinction: Plasma results can’t be equated to statutory BAC limits without proven conversion.
- Flawed formula: The State’s chief chemist relied on an untested formula with estimated variables.
- Scientific challenge: Attorney Christopher Moschkin demonstrated the formula failed the Daubert reliability standard under Rochkind.
- Exclusion of testimony: A detailed memorandum led to the exclusion of the State’s expert, Dr. Mulder.
Outcome
After multiple nonappearances by the expert and delays violating the right to a speedy trial, the court dismissed all charges with prejudice. The case concluded at the District Court level without a jury trial. Strategic selection of a bench trial allowed focused presentation of technical issues before an experienced judge.
Drugged Driving DUI — Security Clearance Saved (2019)
Background
In 2019, a 67-year-old retired State Department employee and former U.S. Army veteran was charged with drugged driving under Maryland Transportation Article §21-902(c) and §21-902(e). Despite being retired, he still needed his security clearance for contract work driving diplomats, ambassadors, and other federal officials. Losing this case would have meant losing his clearance — and his livelihood.
The crash occurred near Burtonsville, Maryland, not far from Silver Spring. The client had totaled his Cadillac XT5, severing a telephone pole. Emergency responders found him unconscious beside the car, and he was transported to a local hospital. While in and out of consciousness, he responded to police questions caught on body camera, admitting to taking Percocet — but toxicology later showed no opioids and only residual cocaine metabolites, not active cocaine.
When this experienced public servant searched for a drugged driving DUI lawyer in Montgomery County, Maryland, he found attorney Christopher Moschkin of Hadden & Moschkin. Mr. Moschkin’s deep knowledge of forensic evidence and courtroom tactics made all the difference in preserving his client’s career and clearance.
Defense Focus
- No active impairment: Cocaine metabolites alone do not prove impairment under Maryland law. The presence of inactive metabolites suggested prior, not recent, use.
- Logical defense: Attorney Moschkin argued that if the defendant were actively high on cocaine, he would have been alert — not asleep or unconscious at the wheel.
- Suppression of body camera statements: The client’s statements to police were suppressed as involuntary due to medical impairment and confusion.
- Chain of custody issues: The State could not produce key witnesses to authenticate the blood chain of custody at trial.
Outcome
When critical evidence was excluded, the State’s Attorney’s Office offered a plea to reckless driving with no jail time. The DUI and drugged driving charges were dismissed. The client successfully completed probation, kept his security clearance, and continued working under contract with the U.S. State Department.
Strategy Detail — The Courtroom Hat
Mr. Moschkin instructed his client to bring his U.S. Army trucker hat to court — not to wear it, but to place it respectfully on counsel’s table facing the judge. The subtle reminder of his military service reinforced credibility and integrity, likely contributing to the judge’s favorable perception.
DUI Dismissed — Business Owner Avoids Massive Insurance Costs (2024)
Background
In 2024, a successful business owner in Montgomery County, Maryland faced a serious DUI charge. With ten company vehicles registered in his name, even a single conviction would have caused an astronomical insurance increase and jeopardized his roofing business. Knowing the stakes, he made the right choice — retaining Hadden & Moschkin and attorney Christopher Moschkin, an experienced DUI lawyer in Montgomery County, Maryland.
The client claimed to have had “just a couple of beers,” and Mr. Moschkin prepared to take the case to trial. Although he recommended his client complete the 26-hour alcohol education and treatment program as a precaution, it ultimately wasn’t needed. The body-worn camera footage showed the client stumbling during the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFSTs), and the officer had to stop the tests for safety to prevent the client from stumbling into traffic.
Defense Focus
- Unavailable arresting officer: The State’s DUI training officer was involved in an unrelated car crash and was unavailable for three scheduled trial dates.
- Reasonable cooperation: Attorney Moschkin agreed to multiple postponements, demonstrating good faith and professionalism.
- Speedy trial demand: On the fourth trial date, Mr. Moschkin invoked his client’s constitutional right to a speedy trial.
- Economic hardship argument: Each delay caused lost income for the client and his employees, which resonated with the court.
Outcome
When the State again failed to produce its key witness, the court granted the defense’s motion and dismissed all DUI charges. The client avoided a conviction, license suspension, and severe commercial insurance rate hikes. After the victory, in a candid elevator conversation, the client admitted to Mr. Moschkin that he may have had more than “just a couple of beers.” Mr. Moschkin reminded him firmly to never drink and drive again — especially after already having faced a prior DUI arrest.
Practice Insight — Responsible Advocacy
Attorney Moschkin not only secured a dismissal but used the win as an opportunity to counsel the client on responsible decision-making. His approach reflects both skilled legal strategy and a genuine commitment to client well-being — the hallmark of ethical, effective DUI defense in Montgomery County.