Georgia Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

A new Georgia sex offender law will allow many low level sex offenders to be taken off the registry much sooner than previously allowed. The new law, which goes into effect on July 1, 2010, has been hailed by proponents as a second chance for many of Georgia's 16,000 convicted sex offenders.

Until the passage of this new law, Georgia was widely criticized for having overly-harsh sex offender laws which primarily focused on punishment instead of protecting the public. The previous law required all convicted sex offenders to wait until 10 years after the completion of any prison, parole or probation sentence before they could petition to be taken off the sex offender registry.

The new law removes the 10 year waiting period for offenders classified as a Level 1 risk assessment, and allows these individuals to file a petition immediately upon completing all prison, parole and probation. A Level 1 risk assessment classification is given to individuals who pose little or no risk to society.

In order for a Level 1 individual to be removed from Georgia's registry, the individual's attorney must file a petition for release in the superior court where the conviction occurred. Once the petition has been filed, the court will hold a hearing at which time it may consider any relevant evidence from the individual's attorney or the district attorney. For a court to release an individual from the registry, the judge must find that the individual does not pose a substantial risk of perpetrating any future sex crimes. The judge may then issue an order which releases the individual from all or some registration, residency or employment requirements.

In addition to Level 1 individuals, the new law also offers hope to offenders who never committed a sexual offense. Under Georgia law, a person convicted of kidnapping or false imprisonment of a minor is automatically required to register as a sex offender. The new Georgia law allows these individuals to file a petition to be removed from the sex offender registry without any waiting periods.

The hope is that Georgia's new sex offender law will provide a second chance to the most sympathetic and deserving individuals while protecting the public from dangerous offenders.

Our sex crimes defense attorneys have helped many individuals navigate the difficult process of being taken off Georgia’s sex offender registry. We are pleased that this new Georgia law has finally made the process more accessible to many individuals who simply do not belong on the registry and never did.

In Georgia and across the nation, federal and state governments have begun targeting pain management doctors for their practices in prescribing pain medication. The federal government alone has arrested over 450 pain doctors since 2004 for allegedly operating “pill mills.” Many doctors and pain patients argue that the government’s intrusion infringes on a doctor’s right to dispense legitimate and necessary medication.

The Rome News-Tribune has the story.

Prosecutors believe that many pain doctors care more about profit than the lives and well-being of their patients. In one case out of Kansas, prosecutors alleged that a single pain management doctor caused the deaths of 68 patients and that many of the deaths were caused by overdoses. The doctor in question was charged with violating controlled substances laws, money laundering and health care fraud.

Many chronic pain sufferers, however, see pain management doctors in a much different light. For them, life is a constant struggle with debilitating pain that can only be alleviated with medications such as OxyContin, hyrdocodone and fentanyl. The Pain Relief Network, an advocacy organization for those suffering with chronic pain, believes that the government often treats individuals who rely on these medications as though they are “subhuman” and drug abusers.

The effect of such prosecutions on the practice of medicine has raised some concerns. The Center for Practical Bioethics in Missouri found that the prosecution of pain doctors has had a “chilling effect” on the legitimate dispensing of pain medication. In fact, it’s estimated that there are less than 5,000 doctors in the U.S. who currently prescribe a high volume of opioids.

Georgia has also seen an increase in physicians who are prosecuted for prescribing painkillers. In one recent highly publicized case, our firm was retained to represent a respected small town doctor in Hart County, Georgia. While the matter is still ongoing, we are confident that the evidence will clearly show our client’s innocence at trial, if the charges are not dismissed before then.

We are also involved in a federal criminal investigation in another state where prosecutors are accusing a well-respected doctor of operating a "pill mill" despite significant evidence that he is acting within the law. We are hoping to convince the government that they should not bring formal charges against the doctor and his employees. But, if they do, we will be prepared to win the case at trial.

We expect to see many more of these cases, both on the federal and state level, as prosecutors start to target pain clinics and doctors in what used to be matters handled exclusively by local medical boards.

Federal authorities in Atlanta, Georgia have indicted four individuals for conspiring to release Freon into the atmosphere. Prosecutors say the four stole copper from commercial air conditioners in Franklin, Hall, Hart and Stephens Counties which caused the dangerous gas to be released. Freon is a type of CFC and is known to deplete the ozone.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

Prosecutors believe that a total of 14 businesses were targeted and that copper was taken from approximately 35 air conditioning units. The stolen copper was then allegedly sold to scrap metal businesses. According to authorities, Freon is released when the copper coils of an air conditioning unit are severed.

The four individuals who have been indicted include Daniel Arnot of Estonollee, Sabrina Westbrooks of Lavonia, Corey Beard of Eastonolle and Justin Joyner of Toccoa. Each defendant has been indicted on 13 counts. If convicted, they could face 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each count.

This is a unique approach to prosecuting what would otherwise be basic theft cases. While there may be some environmental impact to these thefts, it is clearly not the motivating factor in the offense.

Our criminal defense attorneys have successfully represented people charged with environmental crimes in Georgia. We have noticed that environmental cases seem to be a growing area of focus in Atlanta and other federal districts in Georgia.

On Thursday morning, federal law enforcement agents searched K.C. Pit BBQ on Roswell Road in Sandy Springs, Georgia. The reason for the raid is currently unknown.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

Agents from the Internal Revenue Service and the Drug Enforcement Administration spearheaded the raid which took place around 10:30 a.m. In addition to federal agents, North Metro SWAT and Sandy Springs Police were on hand to provide assistance. According to the Treasury Department, IRS and DEA agents also raided the restaurant owner’s home earlier in the day. The owner of the barbeque restaurant is listed as Jiles Johnson.

During the raid, employees were forced to wait in the parking lot. Agents also checked the cell phones of some of the employees while they waited outside.
Federal authorities have not yet commented on the purpose of the raids.

Our criminal defense lawyers have handled many federal drug and tax investigations, and recently won a major federal drug case at trial. After the search warrants have been executed, the agents and prosecutors will usually review the evidence before deciding on any formal charges or indictments. That's a good time for the defense lawyers to attempt to avoid an indictment, or prepare to defend the case at trial. Federal charges often carry much more prison time than state charges, so an investigation like this is potentially very serious.

The Court of Appeals recently reaffirmed the long standing rule that an officer who conducts a traffic stop must have a particularized suspicion that an occupant of the vehicle poses a safety threat before the occupant can be patted-down. The Court went on to hold that this rule holds true even if the officer intends to search the vehicle.

In Molina v. State, a Gwinnett County case, an officer conducted a traffic stop of a pickup truck after noticing a broken tail light. Upon being asked by the officer, the driver consented to a search of the truck. The driver and the passenger, Molina, were then asked to step out of the truck. A backup officer conducted a “Terry pat-down” of Molina to search for weapons. During the pat-down, the officer felt “a large brick-like substance or material or object in his front waistband.” Unsure as to whether the brick was a weapon or drugs, the officer pulled the brick out and discovered that it was a kilo of cocaine. Molina was then charged for trafficking in cocaine.

At the suppression hearing, the officer testified on direct that prior to the pat-down Molina was breathing heavily and that the artery in his neck was pounding rapidly. The officer also stated: “Other than that. . . [he] was pretty normal.” On cross, the officer stated that he patted-down Molina immediately after he exited the truck. The officer also stated, “Every time we have a consent to search and we get someone out of a vehicle, I always pat them down for weapons.” The officer explained: “While I’m going to be tucked inside somebody’s car I want to know if while they’re standing out there they’re armed.” Molina lost the suppression hearing, and following a bench trial, he was sentenced to the minimum 25 years in prison and a $1 million fine.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals reasoned that, “If the officer has a particularized basis for his suspicion the defendant might be armed or dangerous, he may frisk a suspect.” Quoting Terry v. Ohio, the Court went on to state that, “the issue is whether a reasonably prudent man in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.” The Court determined that the officer only observed signs of nervousness, and that under Georgia law, nervousness is insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion.

The State argued that searching a vehicle while the occupant waits outside is enough of a risk to warrant a pat-down. The Court disagreed: “It is not sufficient to say the situation itself poses a danger to the officer and therefore he is justified in frisking a vehicle’s occupant. As many courts have observed, traffic stops are inherently risky. . . but a pat-down must still be based on information specific to the person frisked and not to some general policy.” As a result, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress.

Molina was represented on appeal by John H. Petrey of the Decatur law firm Clegg, Daniels & Petrey, LLC.

Our lawyers have won numerous cases involving clients who were charged with serious drug offenses after being searched by police. In our experience, there is almost always a question as to whether a search was lawfully conducted any time police find drugs on a person or in a vehicle.

In order to show that a search was illegal, a good criminal defense attorney will conduct a thorough investigation which includes reviewing all police audio and video recordings, obtaining any police and witness statements, and examining any technology that was used such as lasers, dog sniffs or wiretaps. When a search is shown to be illegal, the court must generally suppress any drugs found during the search, and any items later found as a result of the search.

Three Chamblee, Georgia employment agencies were raided by ICE and FBI agents on Thursday leading to the indictment of eight business owners and the arrest of 39 suspected illegal immigrants.

Federal agents also arrested two Chinese restaurant owners during the sweep. The three Chamblee employment agencies, "New Fuzhou", "Lucky", and "Zhong Mei", allegedly targeted undocumented workers by advertising in local newspapers.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the story.

The U.S. Attorney's Office in Atlanta claims that the owners of the Chamblee employment agencies placed undocumented workers in Chinese restaurant jobs in Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi and Tennessee. Prosecutors say that the owners did not require paperwork to show that the workers could legally live and work in the country. Prosecutors also believe that the business owners exploited the workers by charging high commission fees and placing them in jobs that required long shifts with substandard pay.

The federal indictments that were handed down on Friday include the names of Pili Chen of Tucker, Chun Yan Lin of Chamblee, Ai Lin Fu of Norcross, Jing Xing Jiang of Lawrenceville, Liang Feng Chen of Duluth, Xian Mei Ke of Duluth, Sau Ting Cheng of Duluth and Chunbiao Xu of Norcross. The indictment goes on to state that Jiang, Ke and Cheng hired undocumented workers through the agencies to work at the Fuji Buffet in Lawrenceville, the Hong Kong Super Buffet located in Gainesville, and the Grand Buffet in Duluth.

The eight business owners have been indicted for conspiracy to induce undocumented aliens to enter and to remain in the county by providing employment. If convicted, each defendant could receive a 10 year prison sentence and a $250,000 fine. To convict an individual of inducing an alien to enter and reside in the country, the government must first prove that the accused individual either had knowledge that the workers were illegally in the country or that the accused acted with reckless disregard.

Our criminal defense lawyers recently handled a similar case in this district. Our client was charged with exactly the same offenses, and we were able to get all charges dismissed before trial.