John has been a trial lawyer for more than 20 years. He is a former federal prosecutor who never lost a trial or appeal. John has also represented some of the country’s largest corporations, including Microsoft, Bank of America, ACE Cash Express, and Philip Morris.
“Over the course of my career, I’ve found that my clients truly appreciate the time, effort, and creativity I put into every case. I am here to help you when you need help the most. That is a responsibility I take very seriously. “
John Helms is a solo practitioner with exceptional experience and expertise as a trial lawyer. Previously a partner in top-tier law firms, Helms has worked on some of the most complex cases and represented some of the largest corporations in the country.
A defense lawyer who was formerly a prosecutor, Helms is uniquely positioned to evaluate cases from both sides and anticipate his opponents’ moves – ensuring the best possible outcome for his clients. Helms has handled both civil and criminal cases, so he is skilled at helping clients facing overlapping civil and criminal issues, including securities fraud, trade secrets, computer crimes and internal corporate investigations. Additionally, some of the types of cases Helms handles include drug possession and trafficking, violent crimes, including manslaughter, assault, kidnapping and homicide, domestic violence defense, DWI, fraud and immigration crimes.
Unburdened by large-firm overhead, Helms delivers his formidable legal skills at an affordable price, while remaining consistently accessible, attentive, and responsive to every client.
Fellow, Dallas Bar Association
Fellow, Texas Bar Association
Barrister, Patrick E. Higginbotham American Inn of Court (2000-2003)
“The Best Lawyers Under 40 in Dallas,” D Magazine (2004)
“Rising Star,” Texas Monthly Magazine (2005)
“The Best Lawyers in Dallas,” D Magazine (2014-2015)
“Texas Super Lawyers,” Texas Monthly Magazine (2014-2015)
Original Source: LinkedIn
Click here for John’s complete bio including education, litigation experience, special appointments, speeches and awards.
On August 19, 2016, John Helms secured a major victory for a client charged in federal court with possession of child pornography. The client had been arrested at DFW airport after he was sent to secondary screening upon arrival in the US. Agents found what they believed to be child pornography on his cell phone. Mr. Helms met with the prosecutor and provided evidence that the photos were of the client’s child sent by the child’s mother to show that the child’s daycare facility was not properly treating a medical condition called phimosis, which affects the foreskin of the penis. The next day the prosecutor dismissed all charges, and the client was able to return home.
John Helms wins dismissal of all claims against his client by a federal court in New York City.
On September 2, 2016, a federal court in New York City granted a motion by John Helms to dismiss all claims against his client based on lack of personal jurisdiction. Mr. Helms’ client was accused of breaching fiduciary duties to his former employer in connection with transactions involving funding for the purchase and sale of giant “off the road” tires used by the mining industry. The court ruled that Mr. Helms’ client could not be sued in New York on the claims against him and dismissed them. The case involves several other parties, but Mr. Helms’ client is now out of the case.
The case is Star Funding, Inc. v. Vault Minerals, LLC et al., No. 15-cv-03026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
On September 7, 2016, a Texas administrative hearing officer ruled that the State of Texas failed to prove that John Helms’ client committed fraud on food stamp applications. The State accused Mr. Helms’ client of falsely claiming on food stamp applications that her common-law husband was not living in her household. If he had been living in her household, his income would have been included with her income for calculating her eligibility to receive food stamps and other assistance. If found to have committed fraud, Mr. Helms’ client would have become disqualified from receiving food stamps and other benefits for a period of time. The ruling means that Mr. Helms’ client and her children can continue to receive government assistance.