How Kenneth Rosenfeld’s Post-Trial Strategy Changed the Outcome of a High-Stakes DUI Murder Case

A guilty verdict is usually considered the endpoint of a criminal case. Most defendants receive an unfavorable ruling after being found guilty and have to spend a large number of years in jail without much hope of winning an appeal. However, some criminal trials continue past the verdict. Such is the case of a DUI felony murder where Kenneth L. Rosenfeld and The Rosenfeld Law Firm managed to change the course of events dramatically through skillful advocacy, even after a conviction.

The case dates back to September 2021, when the defendant allegedly caused an accident under the influence of alcohol while driving their car at speeds surpassing 100 miles per hour with a blood alcohol concentration twice the permissible limit. This resulted in an extremely serious indictment against the person in question, whose case is outlined in an Aug. 30, 2024, probation report submitted to the Stanislaus County Superior Court. This document describes how the defendant was charged with a series of serious offenses.

To begin with, the report includes Count I, which is a felony murder under California Penal Code §187(a), carrying a sentence of 25 years to life. Next comes Count II, a felony vehicular manslaughter with the allegation of great bodily injury, and Counts III and IV, which represent two charges of driving under the influence causing injury. Some of the latter counts carried serious enhancements, including causing great bodily injury, operating the vehicle under the influence with a blood alcohol level 0.15% or greater, and operating the vehicle under the influence with a blood alcohol level 0.08% or greater. Finally, the report included an additional allegation about the defendant having traveled at a speed of 100+ mph during the accident.

With all the above counts and enhancements included in the case, the defendant’s sentencing exposure becomes extremely significant. In light of the guilty verdict the defendant received at the end of the trial, the defendant stood the risk of spending the rest of their life in a state correctional facility.

Fortunately, after the guilty verdict was handed down to the defendant, Rosenfeld and his colleagues managed to alter the outcome. Instead of preparing the case for sentencing, they decided to conduct a post-trial analysis and file a motion for a new trial. During the analysis, the team managed to identify pieces of information not taken into consideration by previous attorneys. Once this step was completed, the newly obtained evidence was brought up in court, which eventually changed the situation for Rosenfeld’s client.

As a result, the felony murder count and the related enhancements were stayed. Both the district attorney and the court came to agree with Rosenfeld's arguments. As a consequence of such an important shift in the situation, the defense did not need to pursue the idea of a new trial anymore. After obtaining this victory, the defense decided on revising the sentencing prospects for the case. Thus, a new possibility emerged in connection with the defendant spending the rest of their sentence in a Conservation (Fire) Camp, subject to approval from the Department of Corrections.

The present case exemplifies Rosenfeld's ability to influence outcomes of difficult criminal trials in a positive way after a negative verdict has been reached. The Brooklyn-born lawyer began his career as a lawyer in Sacramento after receiving his law degree from American University in Washington, D.C., and being admitted to practice in the California State Bar in 1996. He became known as a criminal defense attorney who worked with high-profile clients, such as Roni Lynn Deutch and former NFL player Dana Stubblefield.

This case from Rosenfeld’s career illustrates the importance of perseverance and pursuing all avenues during criminal defense cases. Aspiring attorneys can learn from his example by acknowledging that the end of a trial does not mean the end of a case. There are still options to pursue and ways that they can advocate for their clients even after the trial is over.

Even in the face of the most serious convictions, the right approach at the right time can make all the difference.