Experienced and successful litigators


One of the most recognized trial lawyers in the Chicagoland area, former State's Attorney and Chicago Public School Board President, Raul Villalobos, has been fighting for his clients' rights for over 40 years. Attorneys and judges alike recognize attorney Villalobos for his outstanding record of criminal defense. One of the most active trial attorneys in Illinois courts, Raul Villalobos takes pride in taking cases to trial and winning.

As a managing Partner of Rodriguez and Villalobos, he focused on corporate defense law, representing a diverse array of businesses from Fortune 500 companies to Government Agencies. With experience in many high profile cases, no challenge is too big or too complex.

Whether you are a small business, large corporation, individual or organization, you can benefit from a firm who recognizes your unique needs and special circumstances. With a dedicated focus on our clients we are able to best assess your case to achieve the best possible results.


3/4/2016: People v. N.H. Not guilty of first degree murder

Our client was charged with first degree murder of a man was on the Southwest side of Chicago after 4 eyewitnesses said they saw him step out of a vehicle and shoot one of their friends. At trial in front of a jury, we presented evidence that the witnesses only thought our client was responsible because the victim tried to start a fight with him at a nearby reaturant. On cross examination of the State's witnesses, the case fell apart as we exposed drastic inconsistencies in each of the eyewitness's descriptions of the shooting. We presented evidence that a vehicle matching the shooter's vehicle was caught on a surveillance video driving past the scene of the shooting three times in under 5 minutes just before the shooting. We also presented expert testimony that explained several key pieces of evidence that nobody else could explain. The jury returned a not-guilty verdict in just 3 hours.

1/8/2016: City of Chicago v. Z.M. Not liable for possessing up to12 grams of marijuana.

Our client was accused of possessing up to 12 grams of marijuana when police drove down his alley and found a blunt near where he was standing. Our client had never been arrested before but feared losing his taxi driver's license and student loans if he paid the fine and pled guilty to the citation. At the hearing, our client testified that he was in the alley near his house smoking a cigarette when a police car pulled up and asked him what he was doing. When he told the officers that he was smoking a cigarette, they made him put his hands on the police car and searched his pockets. They found cigarettes and a lighter but gave him a citation for possesion of up to 12 grams of marijuana when they found a blunt on the ground in the alley. Our client testified that there was another group of people in the alley who ran into a nearby yard when the police pulled up. Villalobos & Associates argued that there was no way to connect the blunt to our client, and gwhen combined with the fact that others were present on scene and fled when the police arrived, it could have belonged to someone else. The judge agreed and found our client not liable.

11/20/2015: State of Illinois v. H.S. Not Guilty of Possessing 200 pounds of marijuana.

Our client was charged with possession of 200 pounds of marijuana that was found in the trunk of a car he rented. At trial, the State called a veteran police officer to testify that he was watching our client drive the vehicle to a grocery store parking lot on the Southwest side of Chicago, where he met with another man. The officer further testified that our client exited the car and the other man drove the car to a drug stash house, loaded it with several heavy garbage bags, and then drove back to the parking lot, where our client got back into the car. After hearing this testimony, Villalobos & Associates conducted an in depth investigation of the exact location of the location described by the officer. We rented the exact vehicle that our client used the day of the incident and had an investigator take pictures of the vehicle to show that the officer could not have seen what he claimed to have seen. In addition, we produced Google Maps images backdated several years to the month of the incident showing that there were high bushes that would blocked the officer's view. On cross examination and on rebuttal, Villalobos & Associates discredited the veteran officer's testimony and showed that our client had no idea that his car contained the large bags of marijuana. The judge agreed that the officer's credibility was tarnished and found our client not guilty.