How a Riverside Criminal Defense Attorney Got All Six Felony Charges Dismissed in a Gun and Child Endangerment Case

Quick answer: In People v. M.F. (Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. FEXX2502313), our client faced six criminal counts — including felon in possession of a firearm, possession of a short-barreled shotgun, possession of an assault weapon, prohibited possession of ammunition, willful child cruelty, and drug possession. On May 5, 2026, the Southwest Justice Center ordered every count dismissed under California Penal Code § 1385, the bail bond was exonerated, and our client walked out of custody a free person. This is how a focused defense turned a six-count felony filing into a complete dismissal.

The case at a glance

When prosecutors file six counts at once, the stack is designed to feel overwhelming. Each count carries its own potential sentence, its own enhancements, and its own leverage at the bargaining table. A complete dismissal of all six is the best possible result a defendant can achieve short of a not-guilty verdict at trial — and in many respects it is better, because it ends the case quickly, quietly, and without the risk of a jury.

If you are searching for a Riverside criminal defense attorney because you or a loved one is staring down a multi-count felony complaint, this case explains both what you are up against and what a disciplined defense can accomplish.

What our client was charged with

The felony complaint alleged six violations spanning weapons, ammunition, child safety, and narcotics law. Understanding each charge matters, because the strength of a defense depends on the specific elements the prosecution must prove for every single count.

Count 1 — Penal Code § 29800(a)(1): Felon or addict in possession of a firearm

This statute makes it a felony for anyone with a prior felony conviction — or anyone addicted to a narcotic — to own, purchase, receive, or possess a firearm. It is one of the most commonly charged gun crimes in California, and a conviction can carry up to three years in custody. The prosecution must prove both the prohibited status and knowing possession of the firearm. Each of those elements is a potential pressure point for the defense.

Count 2 — Penal Code § 33215: Short-barreled rifle or shotgun

California prohibits the manufacture, import, sale, or possession of a short-barreled rifle or shotgun. This is a “wobbler,” meaning it can be charged as a felony or a misdemeanor depending on the facts and the defendant’s history. As a felony, it can carry a state prison term.

Count 3 — Penal Code § 30605(a): Possession of an assault weapon

Under California’s assault weapons control law, it is unlawful to possess a firearm classified as an assault weapon. Because the legal definition of an “assault weapon” is technical and turns on specific configuration features, these cases frequently raise disputes about whether the firearm actually qualifies — and whether the defendant knew of the characteristics that brought it within the statute.

Count 4 — Penal Code § 30305(a)(1): Prohibited person in possession of ammunition

This statute mirrors the firearm prohibition but applies to ammunition. Anyone barred from owning a firearm is also barred from owning ammunition. As with the firearm count, the prosecution must establish both the prohibited status and knowing possession.

Count 5 — Penal Code § 273a(a): Willful child cruelty (felony)

This is the most serious non-weapons count. Penal Code § 273a(a) covers willfully causing or permitting a child to suffer, or be placed in a situation that endangers their health or safety, under circumstances likely to produce great bodily harm or death. A felony conviction can carry up to six years in state prison and lasting collateral consequences involving family law and child custody.

Count 6 — Health & Safety Code § 11350(a): Possession of a controlled substance

This count alleged simple possession of a controlled substance. After the passage of Proposition 47, most simple-possession offenses are charged as misdemeanors, which is how this count was treated in the case.

The complaint also included sentencing allegations — that probation should be denied, that a victim was particularly vulnerable, and that the defendant took advantage of a position of trust. Allegations like these are added to increase pressure and limit a judge’s flexibility at sentencing. All of them were ultimately stricken.

Timeline of the Case

Initial Investigation ↓

Arrest and Filing of Criminal Complaint ↓

Six Counts Filed in Riverside County Superior Court ↓

Defense Investigation and Review of Evidence ↓

Analysis of Search-and-Seizure Issues ↓

Evaluation of Firearm, Ammunition, and Child Endangerment Allegations ↓

Matthew Barhoma and his team investigated the case and negotiated the matter ↓

Pre-Plea Negotiations and Litigation Preparation ↓

People’s Oral Motion to Dismiss ↓

May 5, 2026 — All Charges Dismissed Pursuant to Penal Code § 1385 ↓

Bail Bond Exonerated ↓

Client Released from Custody

Case Result Summary

What was actually at stake

Stacked together, these charges created serious exposure. The weapons counts alone are wobblers that can be elevated to felonies and run consecutively. The felony child-cruelty count carried the longest single term and the most damaging collateral consequences. And the sentencing allegations were structured to strip away the discretion a judge would normally use to grant probation or a lighter disposition.

For our client, the practical stakes went well beyond a number on a sentencing sheet. A felony weapons conviction would have meant a lifetime firearms ban, immigration concerns for many defendants, barriers to employment and housing, and — given the child-endangerment count — potential consequences in family court. This is why a multi-count felony filing has to be defended count by count, allegation by allegation, from the very first appearance.

Common Reasons Criminal Charges Get Dismissed in Riverside County

Every criminal case is different. However, prosecutors most commonly dismiss criminal charges when:

• Evidence was obtained through an unlawful search or seizure.
• Witness statements are inconsistent or unreliable.
• The prosecution cannot prove possession beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Physical evidence is weak or incomplete.
• Chain-of-custody issues undermine the reliability of evidence.
• New evidence supports the defense.
• The prosecution determines it cannot meet its burden of proof.
• Dismissal serves the interests of justice under Penal Code § 1385.

Cases involving firearm allegations, child endangerment accusations, and narcotics offenses frequently rise or fall based on evidentiary issues, constitutional challenges, and the prosecution’s ability to prove every element of every charge.

How the defense produced a full dismissal

Every case is different, and no lawyer can promise a particular outcome. What we can describe is the disciplined approach that gives a defendant the best chance at a result like this one.

We treated the arraignment as the start of the fight, not a formality. From the in-custody arraignment on, the defense entered not-guilty pleas on every count and immediately began scrutinizing the basis for the charges. Cases involving searches of a home, a vehicle, or a person frequently turn on whether the search complied with the Fourth Amendment. When evidence is obtained through an unlawful search or seizure, a motion to suppress can remove the foundation the prosecution needs.

We pressure-tested every element of every count. Possession charges require the prosecution to prove knowing possession — not mere presence near an item, and not someone else’s property. Assault-weapon charges require proof that a firearm meets a precise statutory definition. Child-endangerment charges require proof of willful conduct under circumstances likely to cause great harm. When the evidence on any element is thin, that count becomes vulnerable.

We forced the prosecution to confront the weaknesses in its case before a plea was ever entered. California Penal Code § 1385 allows a prosecutor to move to dismiss charges “in furtherance of justice” — and a judge to grant that motion — but as a practical matter, prosecutors move to dismiss when they conclude they cannot prove the case, when the evidence will not survive a suppression challenge, or when continuing forward no longer serves the interests of justice. A defense that methodically exposes those problems makes dismissal the rational outcome.

On May 5, 2026, before the Honorable Judith C. Clark at the Southwest Justice Center, the People made an oral motion to dismiss the entire case. The defense did not object. The court granted the motion and ordered all charges dismissed pursuant to Penal Code § 1385. The bail bond was exonerated and our client was released.

What is a Penal Code § 1385 dismissal, and why does it matter?

California Penal Code § 1385 gives a judge the authority — on the court’s own motion or on the prosecutor’s application — to dismiss a criminal action “in furtherance of justice.” It is the statutory mechanism behind many complete dismissals in California courts.

A few points make a § 1385 dismissal especially significant:

• It ends the prosecution. When the People move to dismiss the action under § 1385 before a plea, the charges go away. There is no conviction, no plea, and no sentence.
• It reflects a problem with the prosecution’s case. Prosecutors generally do not abandon a six-count felony filing lightly. A dismissal on the People’s own motion is a strong signal that the case could not be proven or sustained.
• It frees the defendant immediately. As happened here, a § 1385 dismissal can be accompanied by exoneration of the bail bond and release from custody the same day.

For anyone weighing whether to fight charges or accept an early plea, a § 1385 dismissal is a reminder of why the fight matters. The cases that get dismissed are usually the cases that were challenged — hard, early, and on the merits.

What this result means if you are facing charges in Riverside County

If you have been charged with a firearm offense, an assault weapon violation, a child endangerment count, or a drug crime anywhere in Riverside County — from the Southwest Justice Center in Murrieta to the courts in Riverside, Banning, or Blythe — there are several lessons worth taking from this outcome.

First, the number of charges is not the same as the strength of the case. Prosecutors routinely stack counts. A defense that examines each count separately can collapse the whole structure.

Second, the early stage of a case is the most important. Suppression issues, charging weaknesses, and pre-plea negotiations all happen in the first weeks and months. Waiting to hire counsel can cost you the very opportunities that lead to a dismissal.

Third, who you hire matters. Experience with Riverside County courts, with the specific statutes charged, and with the motions that move cases is what turns exposure into resolution.

Related California Firearm and Weapons Charges

Individuals facing firearm-related allegations are often charged with multiple offenses arising from the same investigation. Common California firearm statutes include:

• Penal Code § 29800 — Felon in Possession of a Firearm
• Penal Code § 25400 — Carrying a Concealed Firearm
• Penal Code § 25850 — Carrying a Loaded Firearm
• Penal Code § 30605 — Possession of an Assault Weapon
• Penal Code § 33215 — Possession of a Short-Barreled Rifle or Shotgun
• Penal Code § 30305 — Prohibited Possession of Ammunition

Because firearm cases frequently involve search-and-seizure issues, constructive-possession arguments, and technical statutory definitions, an experienced Riverside criminal defense attorney should evaluate every available defense immediately after arrest.

Why clients choose Power Trial Lawyers

Power Trial Lawyers is a California criminal defense firm known for taking on serious, high-stakes cases and pursuing the strongest possible result. Lead counsel Matthew Barhoma is not only a trial and appellate attorney but also a recognized legal analyst and commentator. Matthew Barhoma has been featured as legal analysts on major media platforms — including Fox News, ABC, CNN, Forbes, the Los Angeles Times, the Associated Press, Court TV, and Law & Crime — and our high-profile cases have been covered by outlets such as ABC7 News and Yahoo!.

That visibility reflects something our clients experience directly: a firm that understands how to dissect a complaint, how to litigate aggressively, and how to push a case toward dismissal when the facts and the law allow. The outcome described here — six counts dismissed in their entirety — is the standard we bring to every case we take.

Speak with a Riverside criminal defense attorney today

If you have been arrested for a firearm offense, child endangerment allegation, drug crime, assault weapon charge, ammunition offense, or any felony case in Riverside County, immediate action matters. Early intervention often determines whether evidence can be challenged, whether charges can be reduced, and whether dismissal opportunities can be pursued.

Power Trial Lawyers represents clients throughout Riverside County, including cases at the Southwest Justice Center in Murrieta, the Riverside Historic Courthouse, the Banning Justice Center, the Palm Springs Courthouse, and courts throughout Southern California.

Call Power Trial Lawyers today at (888) 808-2179 for a confidential consultation with a Riverside criminal defense attorney. You can Contact Us now for a confidential and free consultation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Attorney advertising. This article describes a real case result for informational purposes only. Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in any future case; every case is different and depends on its own facts and circumstances. Nothing in this article is legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you are facing criminal charges, consult a qualified attorney about your specific situation.