The Nieves Law Firm Criminal Defense Attorneys

Call Directions Website Contact the business

The Nieves Law Firm Criminal Defense Attorneys We take the criminal out of criminal defense. We take the "criminal" out of criminal defense.

2023 Inc 5000 Honoree
(1)

Think it’s “just an accident”? Not always.In California, when a driver is alleged to have been under the influence, a fa...
10/26/2026

Think it’s “just an accident”? Not always.

In California, when a driver is alleged to have been under the influence, a fatal crash can be charged as vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and, in some cases, as murder.

If you are under investigation, speak with a defense attorney before you speak with investigators.

📅 Book a consultation: thenieveslawfirm.com/contact-us
📞 (510) 571-2757
Hablamos español.

Attorney advertising. This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Results may vary.

10/23/2026

Los casos de dr**as no se tratan solo de posesión.

La cantidad, la intención y las agravantes pueden aumentar drásticamente las penas.
📲 Contacta a The Nieves Law Firm.

10/23/2026

Could someone else have had the access and opportunity to commit the crime?

In the trial of Naresh Bhatt, prosecutors have presented circumstantial evidence, including DNA, blood evidence, a power saw, phone activity, and Google searches, to support their case against him in connection with the disappearance and presumed death of his wife, Mamta Kafle Bhatt.

On Court TV, Jo-Anna Nieves discusses how the defense could challenge the prosecution’s evidence by examining who had access to the home and whether another person could have had the opportunity to commit the crime.
Jo-Anna also explains how investigators develop a missing person's pattern of life by examining phone records, recent communications, and reports from people close to the missing person. In this case, the contrast between the concerns expressed by Mamta’s coworkers and Naresh’s response to her disappearance raises questions about his behavior during the investigation.

Ultimately, the defense must identify reasonable doubt, while the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Will the circumstantial evidence be enough to convince the jury?

10/23/2026

Could Naresh Bhatt’s own behavior during the investigation hurt his defense?

In the trial over the disappearance and presumed death of Mamta Kafle Bhatt, prosecutors have pointed to digital evidence, suspicious purchases, and other circumstantial evidence as they argue that Naresh Bhatt killed his wife inside their home.
On Court TV, Jo-Anna Nieves examines Bhatt’s interactions with investigators, including his lack of apparent concern about Mamta’s disappearance and his tendency to volunteer information that was not directly responsive to investigators’ questions.

Jo-Anna explains why those statements including his early attempts to explain Mamta’s absence by pointing to her mental health and past behavior could stand out to jurors when viewed alongside the other evidence presented by prosecutors.
With the defense offering no clear alternative theory in its opening statement, the question becomes whether the prosecution’s circumstantial evidence is strong enough to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

10/23/2026

Can a legal guardian be held criminally responsible for abuse committed in his absence?

On Court TV, criminal defense attorney Jo-Anna Nieves breaks down the two key neglect theories in the Timothy Hauschultz trial: whether Timothy created dangerous conditions through the forced punishment imposed on 7-year-old Ethan Hauschultz, and whether he failed to provide adequate medical care after discovering Ethan’s critical condition.
But another question remains: Was leaving the children under Damian’s supervision itself an act of neglect?

Jo-Anna explains why Timothy’s absence at the time of the abuse does not necessarily eliminate his responsibility. Jurors must consider whether he provided appropriate supervision and whether the harsh disciplinary environment he allegedly encouraged contributed to what happened.

The challenge for the jury is to determine whether Timothy’s decisions and actions amounted to criminal neglect, even though he was not present when the fatal abuse occurred.

10/23/2026

Could a 39-minute delay in seeking emergency medical care have changed the outcome?

On Court TV, Jo-Anna Nieves breaks down one of the key questions jurors faced in the Timothy Hauschultz trial: whether the delay in getting medical attention for 7-year-old Ethan Hauschultz constituted criminal neglect.

After Ethan was found struggling in the snow, Timothy allegedly attempted to warm and dry him before transporting him to the hospital. However, emergency services were never called, raising questions about whether different decisions could have changed the outcome.

Jo-Anna explains why jurors may view the child abuse and forced-exercise allegations differently from the question of whether Timothy failed to fulfill his duty to seek timely medical care. With an estimated 39-minute delay under scrutiny, the jury must consider what actions were reasonably expected under the circumstances.
Ultimately, the question is whether Timothy's actions amounted to criminal neglect and whether the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

10/23/2026

Could the jury reach a mixed verdict in the Timothy Hauschultz case?

Before the case went to the jury, the judge considered whether there was enough evidence to move forward and ultimately denied the defense’s motion to dismiss. During those arguments, the judge raised concerns about the evidence surrounding Damian’s actions and the role Timothy may have played.

On Court TV, Jo-Anna Nieves explains why she expected the jury to potentially convict Timothy on the child abuse-related charges, while struggling with the more difficult question of whether Timothy was a contributing factor in the children’s deaths.

Jo-Anna also breaks down the defense’s argument that Damian was ultimately responsible for the abuse, and whether the prosecution did enough to establish what Timothy knew about the danger inside the home.

10/23/2026

When does a guardian become criminally responsible for harm caused by someone else?

On Court TV, Jo-Anna Nieves discusses the difficult question at the center of the Timothy Hauschultz case: whether Timothy could have foreseen the danger of leaving the children under Damian’s supervision, and whether that decision could make him criminally liable for the abuse that followed.

The defense emphasized that Damian acted independently and that Timothy never instructed him to hurt or discipline the children. But prosecutors argued that Timothy had a responsibility to provide safe supervision and should have recognized the potential danger based on Damian’s prior behavior toward the children.
Jo-Anna breaks down how jurors may weigh foreseeability, prior abuse, supervision, and intervening actions when determining criminal responsibility.

10/22/2026

Receipts.

In California restraining order cases, dated texts, screenshots, photos, and witness names can make the difference. Save what you have, keep the original messages, and don’t edit or crop anything.

📅 Book a consultation: thenieveslawfirm.com/contact-us
📞 (510) 571-2757
Hablamos español.

Attorney advertising. This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Results may vary.

10/22/2026

Can a defense strategy built around reasonable doubt overcome DNA evidence?

In the trial of Miguel Salguero-Olivares, the defense made a strategic decision to rest without presenting evidence, allowing them to have both the first and last word during closing arguments under North Carolina law.
On Court TV, Jo-Anna Nieves breaks down the unusual strategy and the challenge facing the defense. While attorneys attacked the forensic evidence and argued that DNA does not necessarily establish when or how it was deposited, Jo-Anna explains why those arguments may be difficult for the jury to accept without an alternative explanation supported by evidence.

With the prosecution carrying the burden of proof, the defense’s strongest path may be to argue that the state failed to eliminate reasonable doubt but will that be enough given where the DNA was found?

Address

160 Franklin Street Ste. 210
Oakland, CA
94607

Opening Hours

Monday 7am - 11pm
Tuesday 7am - 11pm
Wednesday 7am - 11pm
Thursday 7am - 11pm
Friday 7am - 11pm
Saturday 11am - 11pm
Sunday 11am - 11pm

Telephone

+15108797549

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when The Nieves Law Firm Criminal Defense Attorneys posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to The Nieves Law Firm Criminal Defense Attorneys:

Shortcuts

Share

Category