Expert Defense for Damage to Property Charges
Charged under ARS §13-1602 for criminal damage? Armour Legal evaluates damage estimates, intent, and ownership claims to protect you from fines, restitution orders, and jail time.
We leverage expert assessments and negotiation strategies to reduce charges or pursue diversion programs when appropriate.
We defend defacing, tampering, and property‑damage allegations where value thresholds can escalate charges quickly. We contest ownership, valuation, causation, and mental state, often using independent repair estimates and neutral assessments to correct inflated claims.
Where accountability is appropriate, we negotiate civil compromise and realistic restitution schedules, turning emotionally charged disputes into workable resolutions that courts and victims can accept.
Criminal Damage: Property, Recklessness & Restitution
Criminal damage covers defacing, tampering, or damaging property. Cases often hinge on ownership, permission, value of loss, and mental state. We challenge inflated repair estimates, push for independent assessments, and explore civil resolutions in parallel.
Proving “recklessness” requires more than a bad result; it requires showing an unjustifiable disregard of a known risk. We develop facts that reframe the event as accident, necessity, or misunderstanding, and we scrutinize whether the alleged damage was pre‑existing or caused by someone else.
When restitution is unavoidable, we seek payment plans, community‑service alternatives, or negotiated amounts that reflect real‑world repair costs, not wish lists.
Under ARS §13-1602, criminal damage covers vandalism, graffiti, and destruction of property. Armour Legal disputes inflated repair estimates, challenges the sufficiency of “intent” proof, and secures community-service or deferred-sentencing alternatives for qualifying clients.
For commercial-property cases, we coordinate with insurers to mitigate restitution orders and avoid credit-report impacts—ensuring swift resolution and minimal long-term consequences.
Our approach questions ownership, valuation, causation, and mental state. We obtain independent repair estimates, contest inflated appraisals, and examine whether the alleged damage pre‑dated the incident. On mens rea, we reframe events as accident or necessity and collect supporting proof—weather reports, witness statements, property records.
We negotiate for civil compromise and realistic restitution schedules, often resolving the criminal case in tandem with property claims. When the State insists on maximal charges, we litigate aggressively to keep the level tied to true loss rather than inflated numbers.