SE HABLA ESPAÑOL. MÓWIMY PO POLSKU.
Call For Your Free Consultation Now 312.883.9466
EXPERIENCED CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS DEFENDING CLIENTS NATIONWIDE

Sexual Abuse Defense Lawyers in Chicago

Strategic Defense from Award-Winning Attorneys

A person accused of committing sexual abuse in Illinois could be charged with a Class A misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the individual circumstances of the case. No matter the exact severity of the alleged crime, a conviction for it can bring severe criminal penalties.

A conviction for sexual abuse in Illinois can bring the following sentencing requirements:

  • Lengthy jail or prison time
  • High fines
  • Restitution paid to the victim
  • Mandatory sex offender registration
  • Hours of community service
  • Probation

Are you currently feeling unfairly judged by the criminal justice system and society after being accused of sexual abuse? Pissetzky & Berliner, LLC and our criminal defense attorneys in Chicago can help you clear your name and defend your rights. From the first moment of your case to the last, we are adamant about doing everything in our power to secure the best possible case result, whether that be a case dismissal, not guilty verdict, or charge reduction.


There is no time to lose. Call (312) 883-9466 to get to work on your defense now.


What is Criminal Sexual Abuse?

Illinois law defines criminal sexual abuse as any sort of sexual misconduct that does not necessarily include the accomplishment of sexual intercourse. Sexual abuse may become an escalated charge if the defendant is a minor under the age of 17. As with any sex crime, it should be assumed that the prosecution will work adamantly to secure a conviction in a sex abuse case, regardless of the actions allegedly carried out by the defendant.

Types of sexual misconduct that can be cited in a criminal sexual abuse case include:

  • Groping
  • Sodomy
  • Inappropriate touching
  • Recording sexual acts

Felony Aggravated Criminal Sexual Abuse

Criminal sexual abuse can escalate to a felony if the defendant introduces a threat of force or actual force while committing sexual misconduct. If the alleged victim of the sexual misconduct was unable to provide legal consent due to intoxication, impairment, unconsciousness, and any other reason that would remove the ability to give consent to sexual behavior, it will also be classified as aggravated criminal sexual abuse. Other factors that can classify the crime as a Class 2 felony include if the alleged victim is 60 years old or older, if the criminal sexual misconduct happens while another felony crime is conducted, or if the alleged victim is younger than 13 years old.

As a Class 2 felony, aggravated criminal sexual abuse can carry with it extreme penalties upon conviction. The state may utilize a prison sentence between 3 and 7 years for this crime, with the added possibility of a minimum sentencing requirement. Fines for an aggravated criminal sexual abuse conviction can range up to $25,000.

Your Defense is Our Top Priority

The defense counsel in a criminal defense case in Illinois has the unwavering and inalienable duty to do everything possible to protect the defendant from a conviction. Our Chicago sex crime attorneys both understand and advocate the importance of this duty. When you retain our services for your criminal sexual abuse defense case, you will see that we are second-to-none when it comes to delivering passionate and compassionate defense for people in need, for people in situations just like yours. Our law firm focuses almost-exclusively felony defense cases, giving us insight and knowledge that few other Illinois criminal defense lawyers can claim.

Email our firm or dial (312) 883-9466 to request an initial case review.

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.
  • 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 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 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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. RT
    RT was charged with Possession with intent to deliver half a kilogram of Heroin. RT was facing a Class X Felony. Chicago police officers executed a search warrant at his home where they seized the Heroin. Mr. Pissetzky demonstrated to the judge during cross examination that RT did not have the required knowledge that the Heroin was at the home. The judge found RT Not Guilty.
  • 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.
  • Reduced Charges People v. VR
    VR was charged with possessing hundreds of child pornography pictures and movies on his computer. VR was facing a minimum sentence of at least 30 years in prison. After receiving the discovery from the prosecutor, Mr. Pissetzky and his team conducted their own investigation into the allegations. With the help of his computer expert, Mr. Pissetzky was able to determine that law enforcement was using a specialized program to search private home computers. Mr. Pissetzky requested that the prosecution produce the program so it could be validated and reviewed for its accuracy. The judge ordered a hearing regarding the program, but the prosecution did not want to reveal its secrets. The prosecutor instead reduced the charges and made VR an offer that he couldn’t refuse.

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

  • “Gal saved my life!!!”

    Juan

  • “Excellent Lawyer!”

    Alberto

  • “Super Federal Criminal Lawyer”

    Fernando

  • “Highly Recommended”

    Jesse

  • “Very highly recommended!”

    Scott E.

  • “Phenomenal Attorney”

    George

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

    Former Client

  • “Fantastic attorney”

    Former Client

  • “Magnificent, impressive, very great work”

    Mr. & Mrs. LaGrone Sr.

  • “Super professional and knowlegeable lawyer!”

    Diana

  • “Got me the best possible outcome I could have hoped for.”
  • “I knew I was done until I hired Gal”

    Former Client

  • “Excellent Attorney”

    Former Client