State v. E.C. - Superior Court of Carroll County
This lady was charged with drug trafficking after 250 pounds of marijuana was
found in and around her shop, where it had been stored in a locked freezer. She
was facing a minimum term of imprisonment of five years (with a maximum of 30
years) and a fine of $100,000. We emphasized that she had allowed her former
husband to keep the freezer at her place of business and that the police had
never discovered a key to the freezer in her possession. We also showed how much
she made at a part-time job over thirty miles from her home, and we asked the
jury why someone with a quarter million dollars worth of drugs would drive sixty
miles three times a week to earn $150 to $160 per week. The jury agreed and
found the lady not guilty.
State v. R.B.D. - Georgia Court of Appeals
This client was tried for murder and found not guilty of malice murder. However,
on the felony murder charge the jury found him guilty of aggravated assault.
During the trial we strongly objected when the State was allowed to introduce a
recorded statement of a witness who had died before trial. The jury asked to
hear the recording a second time, so it obviously contributed to the verdict.
The Court of Appeals agreed that admission of the recording violated our
client's Sixth Amendment right to "confront" or cross examine the witnesses
against him and reversed the conviction. On remand the prosecutor offered him
probation with credit for the 14 months he had spent in jail while his appeal
was heard. We insisted on first offender probation, and the prosecutor agreed.
Our client entered his plea, was placed on probation for 14 months with credit
for time served, and went home.
State v. M.M. - Superior Court of Polk County
Our young client was accused of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine.
Following a traffic stop, the automobile in which he was a passenger was
searched, and several of the ingredients for making methamphetamine were found
throughout the car. During the trial we emphasized that all of the incriminating
evidence was found either in the trunk, under the seat, in the console, or in
the glove compartment. In other words, our client did not know the stuff was in
the car, and we relied on the legal presumption that the owner or operator of a
vehicle is in possession of drugs found in the car. During closing arguments the
assistant district attorney stated that he didn't understand our defense. The
jury did, and found the young man not guilty.
State of Georgia v. S.C. - Superior Court of Heard County
This young man was charged with
kidnap, false imprisonment, mutiny in a penal institution, robbery, attempted
theft by taking, battery, and escape.
Basically, a couple of other men decided to break out of the jail, took the keys
from an elderly jailer, locked the jailer in their cell, and unlocked our
client's
cell door so he could follow them. They did make it to the jail parking lot
before a deputy spotted them, but they were all captured shortly thereafter.
The state prosecuted our client under a "party to the crime" theory. We argued
to the jury that they should find him guilty of what he did (misdemeanor escape)
and not guilty of what he did not do. They agreed after less than an hour of
deliberation. The judge sentenced our client to twelve months to serve, the
maximum
allowed by law, but gave credit for time served pending trial. After deciding to
give him two-for-one credit, which is common on misdemeanors in Georgia, the
sheriff released him from this sentence two days later.
State of Georgia v. C.E.H.This gentleman was charged with aggravated assault, malice murder, and felony
murder after shooting a neighbor. The state's "eyewitness" testified that our
client simply walked across the street, pulled out a revolver, and shot the
"victim." However, the owner of the house where the "eyewitness" was visiting
told the jury that they were watching television when they heard the gunshot so
the "eyewitness" could not have seen what she claimed to have seen.
Our client testified that he took a bag of tomatoes to a wheelchair-bound man
who lived on one side of a duplex. When he left, the "victim" rushed at him in a
rage with his hand behind his back. Being fearful for his life, our client shot
him. During the trial we established that the "victim" regularly carried knives,
including a machete, had threatened other individuals with knives, and had prior
convictions for armed robbery and aggravated assault. The jury deliberated
for less than four hours before returning a "not guilty" verdict on all counts.
T.F. v. State of Georgia - Supreme Court of Georgia
The defendant was the driver of a van involved in
an accident that resulted in her passenger sustaining a broken hip. At
that time Georgia's Implied Consent Law authorized testing of a driver's blood,
urine, breath, or other bodily substances to determine if the driver was under
the influence of alcohol or drugs without probable cause to believe that the
driver was under the influence. A test of our client's blood and urine revealed
the presence of cocaine metabolites.
Following her conviction for DUI-drugs and Serious Injury by Vehicle, we
appealed her convictions to the Supreme Court of Georgia, challenging the
constitutionality of the statute. The Supreme Court unanimously reversed her
conviction and held that a search of a person's blood or urine without probable
cause violates both State and Federal constitutional guarantees
against unreasonable searches and seizures. Therefore, that section of the
Implied Consent Law was unconstitutional.
S.W.C. v. State of Georgia - Georgia Court of Appeals
The defendant was sentenced to serve 28 years on two counts of felony
vehicular homicide following a jury trial. He was also convicted of two counts
of driving under the influence of drugs, specifically amphetamine and
methamphetamine, and a couple of other minor offenses. We did not represent him
at trial but handled his appeal.
The Court of Appeals reversed his convictions
on the felony vehicular homicide and DUI charges. We did not appeal the
non-drug-related convictions on two counts of homicide by vehicle in the second
degree, one count of failure to obey a traffic signal, and one count of giving a
false name to a law enforcement officer.
On appeal we contended that the client received ineffective assistance of
counsel because his lawyer did not move to suppress the results of blood and
urine tests showing methamphetamine and amphetamine in his system at the
time his truck crashed into another vehicle, killing two people therein.
Specifically, we argued that the undisputed record showed that he was coerced
into taking the blood and urine tests, and that his trial counsel wholly failed
to argue this point. After police arrived at the scene of the accident our
client was given the implied consent warning and refused to give consent. Police
threatened to obtain a search warrant and to forcibly use a catheter to obtain
the samples if he did not give consent. In the face of this threat, he finally
consented. Subsequent analysis of the defendant's blood and urine showed that
both contained amphetamine and methamphetamine.
By statute, the legislature has granted drivers the right to refuse to take a
State-administered test. The consequence of exercising this right is that the
evidence of the refusal is admissible in the driver's criminal trial and that
the State may suspend the person's driver's license. Contrary to the police's
representation to Collier, the consequence of refusing is not that the police
may then obtain a search warrant and forcibly conduct the tests.
The Court of Appeals held that by threatening our client with forcible testing,
the police misled him about the consequences of refusing to consent to the
requested tests. Therefore, his trial attorney's failure to contest this
evidence was deficient, and his convictions were reversed.
The Georgia
Supreme Court unanimously upheld the decision of the Court of Appeals, which
reversed the client's convictions for felony vehicular homicide (homicide by
vehicle) and driving under the influence of drugs. Our efforts saved him at least twenty
years in prison.
State of Georgia v. S.W.
The Defendant was charged with Theft by Taking.
The State claimed that this K-Mart employee had disconnected an alarm on an
emergency exit by taping the magnet attached to the door to the magnet attached
to the door frame and then unscrewing the magnet attached to the door so it
would remain in contact with the other even when the door was open. He was a
night worker, and a pile of merchandise was found outside when the morning
manager patrolled the parking lot at 6:00 A.M. Our client’s fingerprints were
found on the tape that held the lower magnet in place. We emphasized that two
suspicious individuals had been spotted in the stockroom the night before the
theft, they had not left the store through the front or side doors that were
guarded by K-Mart employees, they had not set off an alarm by leaving through
any other exit, and the police and the manager who searched the store had not found
them. This jury deliberated for slightly more than an hour before returning a
verdict of not guilty.
State of Georgia v. K.P.
The Defendant was accused of arson and murder arising from the death of a
woman whose husband had been having an affair with the Defendant. She and the husband
were alleged to have set the decedent’s home on fire following an argument between the
decedent and her husband. The State’s scientific evidence showing that there was a flammable
liquid in the Defendant’s clothing had one minor defect: The flammable liquid was a
component of the glue used to hold her tennis shoes together. Our arson expert also testified that
there were no pour patterns, and we vigorously attacked the State’s time line. Following an
eight-day trial the jury deliberated for two hours before returning a verdict of “Not guilty” on all
charges.
State of Georgia v. W.L.B.
The Defendant was charged with aggravated assault and possession of a firearm
by a convicted felon. Two eyewitnesses testified that they saw him point the gun
at another man and fire two rounds. Careful cross-examination brought out inconsistencies in
their statements, and the crime lab technician testified that he could not tell for sure if the
bullets fired came from the gun recovered at the Defendant’s residence or not.
The jury acquitted the Defendant after deliberating for two hours and forty-five minutes.
State of Georgia v. R.W.
Our client was charged with possession of drugs after contraband was found in
his shoe during a traffic stop. We contended that he should have been allowed to leave
after the reason for the traffic stop had been dealt with and that the continuing
investigatory detention of the client violated his 4th amendment right to be
free of unreasonable searches and seizures. The trial court agreed and
suppressed the drugs, which means that the charge was dismissed.
State of Georgia v. A.M.
The trial judge overruled our motion to
suppress cocaine seized after a traffic stop. However, we were successful when
the Court of Appeals reversed that ruling. Our client was a passenger in a truck
stopped for a traffic infraction. The officer asked the driver for permission to
search the vehicle three times before she agreed. Before actually looking in the
truck, the officer conducted a patdown search of our client, ostensibly to look
for weapons. The Court of Appeals agreed with our contention that in order to
conduct a patdown search for weapons an officer must have a reasonable,
articulable suspicion to believe that an individual is armed and presents a
danger to the officer or others. Here there was no evidence that the officer
harbored such a reasonable belief; in fact, he admitted that he pats down people
whenever he searches a motor vehicle. Therefore, the Court of Appeals ruled the
the cocaine must be suppressed, which means the end of this case for our client.