A Pima County jury in Tucson, Arizona, on Tuesday, November 10, 2026, found Dr. Dung T. Nguyen not guilty on all 31 counts of sexual assault and sexual abuse, ending a trial of roughly eight weeks that centred on allegations by 19 former patients. The verdict was returned at about 11 a.m., according to the defence team's published case summary, and Tucson television stations KGUN 9 and azFamily reported the acquittal the same day. The judge then vacated all of Nguyen's conditions of release.
The charges were allegations, and they remain allegations the jury rejected. Prosecutors with the Pima County Attorney's Office alleged that Nguyen sexually assaulted and abused patients during physical examinations, with some allegations reaching back nearly two decades. Nguyen denied the allegations through his lawyers and pleaded not guilty; the jury acquitted him on every count — 31 counts, 19 accusers, zero convictions.
How the case was built
Nguyen was indicted in April 2025 following an investigation by the Tucson Police Department, according to the case timeline. The jury trial began in September 2026 in Pima County. Closing arguments concluded on November 5, 2026, and the jury deliberated for several days before returning its verdict on November 10. The case drew heavy local coverage from the day police publicised the allegations — a fact that itself became part of the trial, because the defence argued that many accusers came forward only after that publicity and media coverage.
The counts were brought under two Arizona statutes: sexual assault under A.R.S. § 13-1406, which covers sexual intercourse or oral sexual contact without consent, and sexual abuse under A.R.S. § 13-1404, which covers sexual contact without consent. In a medical-examination case, the legal fight turns on consent and deception: the state's theory was that patients agreed to an examination and were deceived about what was actually happening, while the defence answer was that a legitimate examination is exactly what it appears to be and that the state had to prove, count by count, both improper contact and deception beyond a reasonable doubt.
What the jury heard from each side
Jurors do not explain their verdicts, so no one can say exactly which arguments carried the day. What the public record shows is the defence the jury heard, as set out by Nguyen's lawyers: the state acknowledged the case rested on testimony rather than physical evidence, so every count turned on the credibility of one account; the 31 counts were 31 separate charges on which the burden never shifted to the defendant; many accounts surfaced after police publicised the investigation, and the defence raised the role of civil claims and financial incentives in bringing more accusers forward; and where the prosecution called the similarity of the testimony too consistent to ignore, the defence asked why people who said they did not know each other used the same words.
Nguyen was defended by trial attorneys Michael Tamou and Kristie Ortega of Tamou Law Group, PLLC, together with Michael Bloom of Michael J. Bloom Law Offices. After the verdict, Bloom told reporters the trial showed Nguyen to be “an absolutely wonderful doctor and a wonderful person,” and described the case as one of the longest trials in Pima County history, according to azFamily's reporting as cited by the defence firm.
Sexual assault in Arizona is a class 2 felony carrying 5.25 to 14 years on a first offence, with a presumptive term of 7 years, no probation, and — under A.R.S. § 13-1406 — sentences that must run consecutively to any other sexual assault sentence. On 31 counts, a conviction would have meant exposure measured in decades in prison.
Why the verdict is final
An acquittal by a jury is the most final outcome in American criminal law. A.R.S. § 13-4032 lists the rulings the state may appeal, and a jury verdict of not guilty is not one of them; double jeopardy bars any retrial on the same charges. With nothing left to secure, the court vacated every condition that had restricted Nguyen while the case was pending. Separate tracks remain legally separate: a criminal verdict does not decide civil lawsuits, which use a lower standard of proof, or any Arizona Medical Board matter, which runs on its own process — and no outcome in either was reported with Tuesday's verdict.
The case also lands in a community where medicine and trust are personal. Tucson is home to a large community of immigrant families, including South Asian and Punjabi families across the Tucson and Phoenix metro areas, for whom a long, public trial of a doctor accused by his own patients — and then acquitted on every count — cuts in two directions at once: patients must be able to report abuse and be heard, and an accused professional is entitled to have the state prove every single charge. On November 10, a jury of Pima County residents weighed eight weeks of that evidence and found the state had not proved any of the 31 counts.
What happens next
Criminally, nothing: the prosecution is over and cannot be appealed or retried. Any civil claims by former patients, or any Arizona Medical Board proceeding concerning Nguyen's licence, would move on their own timelines and under different rules, and neither prosecutors nor the board announced new steps alongside the verdict. Nguyen's release conditions are gone. Awaaz Punjab will report any board or civil development as a separate story if and when officials or courts put it on the record.