SE HABLA ESPAÑOL. MÓWIMY PO POLSKU.
To Get Us In Your Corner Call Now 312.883.9466

Attention Clients:
Our office is open and available for remote video and telephone consults. We are set up to represent you remotely and are still here to help with your legal options during this time.

  • Trial Lawyers of 2020
  • Super Lawyers Gal Pissetzky
  • 10 best attorney client satisfaction
  • Top 100 trial lawyers
  • Super lawyers
  • Avvo Rating 10.0 superb top criminal attorney
  • Lawyers of distinction 2018
Pissetzky & Berliner

NATIONWIDE CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYERS IN CHICAGO

litigation, arguing & advocating is my passion

Do you need to assert your right to a trial so you can fight for a not-guilty verdict? If so, then Pissetzky & Berliner, LLC is the firm for you. Clients come to us when they want a bulldog in the courtroom. We take on serious criminal cases. We handle federal charges, white collar crimes, large-scale drug crimes, sex offenses, violent crimes, and more. We have argued cases before the Illinois Supreme Court, Illinois Appellate Courts, and Federal Appellete Courts. For more than a decade, we have helped clients fight off felony charges throughout state and federal courts.

WGN PLUS Backed by a proven track record, our Chicago criminal defense lawyers have garnered recognition's such as inclusion in the National Trial Lawyers: Top 100 and Illinois’ list of Super Lawyers® Rising Stars℠. We are ready to battle for your rights, your freedoms, and your future.

No matter what crime you were arrested for, no matter how complex your charges may be, we offer the award-winning, trial-tested advocacy that you need at Pissetzky & Berliner, LLC.

  • FOX6now.com
  • The National Herald
  • El Paso Times
  • The Washington Post
  • Associated Press
  • Daily Herald
  • dailymotion
  • The News Tribune
  • Pressreader

Why Hire Pissetzky & Berliner, LLC?

  • 19+ YEARS OF TRIAL-TESTED DEFENSE

  • NOT-GUILTY VERDICTS & CASE DISMISSALS

  • 10.0 OUT OF 10.0 SUPERB AVVO RATING

  • ILLINOIS SUPER LAWYERS®

  • IN THE NATIONAL TRIAL LAWYERS: TOP 100

OUR CRIMINAL DEFENSE VICTORIES

  • CASE DISMISSED CASE DISMISSED AFTER STATE REFUSES TO COOPERATE
    People v. IP (2014) Mr. IP was arrested for possession of a large amount of a controlled substance after Chicago police executed a search warrant. Arguing that the information in the search warrant was fabricated, Mr. Pissetzky filed a Motion to Produce Informant. Against the odds, the judge granted the motion and ordered the State to produce the informant. When the State failed to do so, the judge dismissed the case.
  • Sentenced Reduced Heroin Conspiracy
    USA v. DA – 2011 – Mr. DA was charged in one the biggest Heroin busts in Chicago. DA was facing a mandatory life sentence under the Federal Rules because he was a repeat offender. After long negotiations, Mr. Pissetzky was able to demonstrate that DA was not part of the conspiracy and convinced the judge to sentence DA to only 37 months. All other charges were dropped.
  • Case Dismissed Motion Granted, Case Dismissed
    People v. RMC – Chicago police officers received information that a 2 kilo cocaine deal was going to happen in a garage. They set up surveillance and saw RMC pull into the garage in car. When he walked out of the garage, the Chicago police officers arrested him. While the officers searched the garage and car, they found 2 kilos of cocaine in the car. Mr. Pissetzky and another attorney filed a Motion to Suppress the Arrest and Quash the evidence. After a highly contested hearing, the judge held that the Chicago Police officers violated RMC’s Constitutional rights under the 4th Amendment, and Granted the Motion. The prosecutor had no choice but to dismiss all charges against RMC.
  • Not Guilty Not Guilty: possession of cocaine with the intent to deliver
    People v. JB – 2011 – Mr. JB was charged with 3 other co-defendants with possession of cocaine with the intent to deliver. Although the State’s attorney made a very low offer for a plea, Mr. Pissetzky advised JB to proceed to trail. During a bench trial, Mr. Pissetzky proved to the judge that JB did not have any knowledge of the drugs that were recovered from the car of the co-defendant. Although the police testified that they saw the drug transaction, Mr. Pissetzky convinced the judge that the state did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge found JB NOT GUILTY on all charges.
  • Not Guilty on All Counts People v. AB
    AB was charged with child pornography, criminal sexual abuse and criminal sexual assault. Although the State made several offers on the case, Mr.Pissetzky and another attorney demanded trial. At trial, Mr. Pissetzky cross-examined the State’s witnesses and proved that AB did not know that the victim was under 18 years of age. After listening to the evidence, the judge found AB NOT GUILTY on all counts.
  • Dismissed People v. AH
    AH was charged with possessions with intent to distribute a large amount of cocaine. Mr. Pissetzky litigation skills led to the dismissal of all charges against AH.
  • Case Dismissed People v. AMM

    People v. AMM - Mr. AMM was charged with trafficking over 100lb of marijuana. Officers can to a home he was renting and after entering and searching the home, they seized over 100lb of marijuana. Mr. Pissetzky filed a motion to suppress evidence arguing that the officers entered the home without a warrant or consent. After a hearing in which Mr. Pissetzky impeached the testifying officer and exposed his lies, the Judge granted the motion and the case was dismissed.

  • Case Dismissed People v. ARP
    ARP was charged with a Class X felony of Possession with Intent to Distribute cocaine . After careful review of the police reports, Mr. Pissetzky filed a motion to quash and suppress evidence. At the hearing, Mr. Pissetzky proved to the judge that that the Cook County Sheriff that stopped ARP search ARP’s car illegally. The judge Granted the motion to quash and suppress and the case against ARP was Dismissed.
  • Not Guilty People v. FR
    FR was charged with predatory criminal assault, and 4 counts of aggravated criminal sexual assault. During a week long jury trial, Mr. Pissetzky exposed the alleged minor “victim” as a liar. In addition, Mr. Pissetzky call witnesses to testify to the true nature of the “victim”. After grueling cross-examinations, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on all charges.
  • Not Guilty People v. H
    People v. H- H was charged with the first degree murder of 3 people. The prosecutor had two witnesses that claimed they were with H when he committed the murders. After receiving the discovery from the prosecutor, Mr. Pissetzky and his team conducted their own investigation and uncovered that someone else committed the murders. At trial, Mr. Pissetzky cross examined the prosecutions witnesses and exposed their lies. After the prosecution rested their case, Mr. Pissetzky moved the court to dismiss all charges and find H not guilty. The Judge agreed with Mr. Pissetzky and found H Not Guilty of all charges dismissing the case.

TRUSTED AND HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

SEE WHAT OUR CLIENTS ARE SAYING
  • “I highly recommend Gal Pissetzky!!!”

    Sonni

  • “We are SUPER BLESSED to have found a great attorney like Mr. Pissetzky. He helped me in a legal situation that would have been a nightmare for my ...”

    Andy

  • “Magnificent, impressive, very great work”

    Mr. & Mrs. LaGrone Sr.

  • “Got me the best possible outcome, highly recommend”

    Former Client

  • “I knew I was done until I hired Gal”

    Former Client

  • “Got me the best possible outcome I could have hoped for.”
  • “Phenomenal Attorney”

    George

  • “Gal saved my life!!!”

    Juan

  • “Gal Pissetzky”

    Alejandro Martínez-Medina

  • “Super professional and knowlegeable lawyer!”

    Diana

  • “Highly Recommended”

    Jesse

  • “Excellent Lawyer!”

    Alberto

  • “Very highly recommended!”

    Scott E.

  • “I can't have chosen a better criminal lawyer.”

    Anonymous

  • “Super Federal Criminal Lawyer”

    Fernando

Stay Updated

  • Federal Sentencing

    There is a big difference between state and federal court when as to how a judge determines your sentence. If you decide to enter into a plea in state ...

    View More
  • The Differences between Sheriff’s Electronic Monitoring, Pre-Trial Services Electronic Monitoring, and G.P.S.

    Now more than ever, courts are adding some type of electronic monitoring as a condition of bond. Though Sheriff’s Electronic Monitoring, Pre-trial ...

    View More
  • What is Discovery?

    When I first meet with prospective client, many of the them ask me what I think of their case, or what arguments I will make to win their case, or if ...

    View More

DON'T WAIT, CONTACT US NOW!

All Consultations are Free and Confidential
  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.