Georgia Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

The Court of Appeals of Georgia recently had to determine if a suspect could be briefly detained where the facts showed that he was driving slowly and looking into the woods of an area where an alleged car thief was hiding. The court held that on these facts alone a person could not be detained.

In Thomas v. State, the defendant, Thomas, was convicted of possession of methamphetamine, possession of a firearm during a crime, and obstructing a police officer. The facts showed that a man by the name of Morris stole a car and abandoned it at a house on Penland Road in Walton County. Police believed that Morris then went to hide in the nearby woods.

An officer saw Thomas in his truck driving very slowly along the same road while looking into the woods as if trying to find someone. Thomas apparently stopped and continued driving very slowly several times. The officer ran Thomas’ tags and discovered that Thomas lived near Morris. This led to the officer stopping Thomas’ truck. While approaching Thomas, the officer saw a cell phone in Thomas’ hands and took the phone after Thomas refused to hand it over. The officer searched the call history and saw Morris’ number. Thomas explained that he was looking for pulp wooders. The officer then asked Thomas to get out of the truck so that the officer could take a picture of Thomas, but Thomas refused. As a result, the officer arrested Thomas for obstruction. A gun was found in the truck, and meth was later found on Thomas at the jail.

The encounter between Thomas and the officer was a second tier encounter. This is where an officer may briefly detain a suspect if the officer has a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that a person is involved in criminal activity. Here, the court reasoned that Thomas had not broken any traffic laws, presented a valid license, and explained that he was looking for pulp wooders. Thus, the court held that his arrest for refusing to get out of the truck to be photographed was illegal. Moreover, the evidence found after the arrest should have been suppressed.

Our criminal defense lawyers have also won many drug and weapons cases due to police officers executing illegal stops of persons and vehicles. In our experience, there is almost always a question of whether a stop was lawfully conducted any time drugs or weapons are found on a person or in a vehicle. To challenge a stop that reveals contraband, a criminal defense attorney must be able to argue that the officer had no legal reason to detain or arrest the person and that consent was not given. An experienced criminal attorney will do this by conducting a battery of assessments which may include reviewing police and witness statements, obtaining police video recordings, and analyzing any form of technology which led to the stop such as radar, laser, sensors, taps or dog sniffs.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for people charged with serious crimes. We have successfully represented clients facing serious federal criminal charges and state criminal charges in courts across Georgia. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Page Pate was recently the Chairman of the Criminal Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association.

The Court of Appeals of Georgia recently ruled that an eight year delay between the time of a defendant’s arrest date and trial date was presumptively prejudicial. The court went on to find that the state failed to rebut this presumption, and upheld the trial court’s dismissal of charges based on the right to a speedy trial.

In State v. Porter, the defendant, Porter, was arrested for allegedly molesting his child in 2000. He was indicted in 2001 and released on bond. New allegations arose in 2004 that he had molested his other child, and the trial judge issued a bench warrant for his arrest in 2005 for failing to appear on those charges. He was arrested in 2006 and a second indictment was issued against him for the new allegations. In 2006, the state moved to set a trial date for both cases. In 2008, the trial judge recused herself, and the case was transferred and set for trial in December 2008. The defendant then moved the court twice for continuances followed by a motion to dismiss or plea in bar for violation of his right to a speedy trial. The trial judge agreed and dismissed the 2001 charges. The state appealed the ruling.

The Sixth Amendment and the Georgia Constitution promise criminal defendant’s the right to a speedy trial. The courts use a two part test to determine if a violation of this right has taken place. First, the court will look to see if the time between arrest and trial is presumptively prejudicial. Here, eight years had passed from arrest to trial, and the court found this to be presumptively prejudicial. Second, the court will look to see if the delay was uncommonly long, who was responsible for the delay, the timeliness of the defendant’s assertion of his right to a speedy trial, and prejudice to the defendant. The court found that nearly 7 years of the delay was the government’s fault, and that the state failed to rebut the actual prejudice suffered by Porter. The court found this to be true even though Porter didn’t raise his right to a speedy trial until 2009.

Our criminal defense attorneys have also won dismissals in numerous child molestation cases in many parts of Georgia. It is important to understand that a conviction for child molestation can severely impact the rest of a person’s life through long periods of incarceration and having to register as a sex offender once released. Hiring an experienced criminal defense attorney early on is often critical to winning these cases, since an investigation into a molestation case is multifaceted. Among the many steps in an investigation, a criminal defense attorney will look for inconsistencies in the statements made by the alleged victim, hire medical or psychological experts to give testimony on what events took place, and examine the context of each case in order to determine if the child was coerced by a third party.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for people charged with serious crimes. We have successfully represented clients facing serious federal criminal charges and state criminal charges in courts across Georgia. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Page Pate was recently the Chairman of the Criminal Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association.

The Court of Appeals of Georgia recently held that a traffic stop is improper where the suspect simply parks in front of a residence where criminal activity has taken place.

In Pritchard v. State, the defendant, Pritchard, was convicted of a single count of possession of methamphetamine. On the day of Pritchard’s arrest, an unidentified person called the Newton County Sheriff’s Department to report suspicious vehicles around a residence that the police had previously identified as a “drug house.” Upon arriving, the deputy was flagged down by the caller who stated that a truck and a Camry had just pulled out of the residence. As the deputy approached the Camry, Pritchard, the driver, pulled into another driveway. A different deputy then went to converse with Pritchard and discovered that she did not live there. The deputy then instructed Pritchard to pull out of the driveway. The deputy later testified that the driver was “stopped” and not free to leave at this point. As the deputy was speaking to Pritchard, he saw a clear plastic baggie in the middle console which later tested positive for methamphetamine and subsequently led to her conviction.

The Court of Appeals noted that a police officer must have a particularized and objective basis for suspecting a person of criminal activity in order to make an investigatory stop. Furthermore, the Supreme Court of Georgia has held that an officer lacks a reasonable and articulable suspicion necessary to stop a person who is driving near or parking near a location where crimes have been committed. Here, the only evidence to justify a traffic stop was that Pritchard’s vehicle was in front of a “drug house.” Thus, the traffic stop which led to the methamphetamine was a violation of Pritchard’s Fourth Amendment rights which required her conviction to be reversed.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for people charged with serious crimes. We have successfully represented clients facing serious federal criminal charges and state criminal charges in courts across Georgia. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Page Pate was recently the Chairman of the Criminal Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association.

The DeKalb County Recorder’s Court was plagued by a ticket scam earlier this year which led to the indictments of three employees and five other individuals. A grand jury recently concluded that the court is haunted by lax oversight and leadership problems which continue to make it vulnerable to fraud.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The DeKalb County Recorder’s Court handles traffic tickets and misdemeanor crimes. In 2008, a review of the court found that millions of dollars in fines were never paid to the court. Three employees were then indicted this year in an alleged ticket-fixing scam. One of those employees pleaded guilty last week to violating the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and received a 12 month sentence.

A grand jury was empaneled during July and August to review the court’s operations and oversight. It heard testimony from various officials including Chief Judge R. Joy Walker who is the head of the DeKalb County Recorder’s Court. The grand jury found that there was no oversight at the time of the scam, and that Judge Walker took no action even after learning of the scam.

Judge Walker disputes the findings and claims that action was taken. She believes that court workers would carry out the fraud by telling judges that police officers had reduced tickets from fines to warnings. The workers would then charge fees for dismissing the tickets. Walker claims that upon learning of the scam she created a new policy in which an officer would have to show up in court or put a request in writing in order to downgrade a ticket from a fine to a warning.

DeKalb County CEO Burrell Ellis stated that the grand jury’s findings confirmed prior suspicions, and that the findings justify an audit of the court. The grand jury also recommended several changes including more officers to enforce warrants and an improved computer system to monitor cases.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for people charged with serious crimes. We have successfully represented clients facing serious federal criminal charges and state criminal charges in courts across Georgia. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Page Pate was recently the Chairman of the Criminal Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association.

The Court of Appeals of Georgia recently ruled that a suspect who walks away from police in a known drug area and appears nervous does not form enough of a particularized suspicion necessary to detain or seize the suspect.

In Walker v. State, the defendant, Walker, was convicted by a jury of possession of cocaine and two counts of misdemeanor obstruction of an officer. During the daylight hours of March 27, 2007, four Covington police officers were driving through a high-drug area in an unmarked car. The area received ongoing complaints about drug activity, but the police had not received any complaints on this particular day. They came upon four men, including Walker, standing in the street, and as the car came to a stop, the four men began walking out of the street and into a yard. An officer got out of the vehicle and told the men: “hey, hold on guys, come here, come here.” Walker complied. The officer noted that Walker was very nervous and patted Walker down for weapons but found none. The officer then asked if he could search Walker. Walker responded that the officer had already searched him. The officer explained that, “a search is where I go inside pockets. . . do you have a problem with me doing that.” Walker consented. In addition to checking every pocket, the officer pulled Walker’s pants out from his stomach and found a small bag in the crotch area. Walker attempted to pull away but was tackled and police ultimately used a taser gun on him. Cocaine was found in the small bag.

The appellate court determined that the stop made by the officers was a Terry stop. During a Terry stop, an officer may only detain a person briefly if he has a particularized and objective basis for suspecting that the suspect is involved in criminal activity. Yet, the officer here could not articulate a particularized basis for suspecting Walker of criminal activity, since nervousness and walking away are not enough to detain a suspect for purposes of a Terry stop. Thus, the detention was illegal. Furthermore, the search would have been invalid even if Walker had not been illegally detained, because a search in this case would only be legal if Walker had consented to it. However, he only consented to his pockets being searched and not his crotch area. Consequently, the search was illegal and the cocaine should have been suppressed. The court reversed Walker’s conviction as a result.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for people charged with serious crimes. We have successfully represented clients facing serious federal criminal charges and state criminal charges in courts across Georgia. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Page Pate was recently the Chairman of the Criminal Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association.

The former chairman of the Crawford County Commission, Harry Spillers, was indicted in 2005 for false swearing of which he was ultimately convicted and removed from office. However, the Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed Spillers’ conviction for false swearing last week.

The Macon Telegraph has the story.

The conviction and controversy centered on whether Spillers knowingly lied in 2004 on a form which he was required to fill out in order to hold office in Georgia. Specifically, the form asked if he had ever been convicted of a felony. Spillers stated that he had not been convicted of a felony even though he pleaded nolo contendere to the charge of aggravated assault in 1986.

In last week’s ruling, the Court of Appeals found that he was never formally convicted of the aggravated assault charge, since he only pleaded nolo contendere. Thus, he was still eligible to hold office after pleading nolo contendere and did not lie in the 2004 statement.

Prosecutors are now considering whether to appeal the case. They may also bring additional charges against Spillers. Prosecutors say Spillers used county labor for personal use during his time as commissioner.

Pate & Brody is an accomplished Georgia law firm with offices in Atlanta, Macon and Madison. Our lawyers are dedicated to pursuing justice for people charged with serious crimes. We have successfully represented clients facing serious federal criminal charges and state criminal charges in courts across Georgia. Our lawyers have been recognized on the list of Georgia's "Super Lawyers", and included among Georgia's "Legal Elite" by Georgia Trend Magazine. Page Pate was recently the Chairman of the Criminal Law Section of the Atlanta Bar Association.