Recent Trials

CASE: State of Georgia v. David Michael Sterling (09-B-5014-10

RESULT: (March 2010) Five day jury trial on two counts of aggravated child molestation, two counts of sodomy and one count of child molestation resulted in NOT GUILTY on all charges.

FACTS: On June 12, 2007, while vacationing in Michigan, victim-nephew Sychar was caught forcing his younger brother Justus to perform oral sex on victim-nephew Sychar. The mother of both children separated the children, and sent vicitm-nephew Sychar to stay with relatives in Detroit, Michigan. Eighteen days later on June 30, 2007, the mother and family walked into a police station in Sterling Heights, Michigan alleging the victim-nephew Sychar revealed the Uncle David (client) touched the victim-nephew when Uncle David visited the family in Georgia back in February of 2003. The incident in February 2003, supposedly happened only one time. The client was arrested in Michigan on August 3, 2007, extradited to Gwinnett County and remained in jail until today, (March 26, 2009), when the jury returned a verdict of not guilty (almost three years). The prosecutor maintained that the child kept the secret of the molestation by Uncle David for four and a half years, while the defense maintained that the molestation never happened. The defense argued that the nephew-victim leveled allegations against Uncle David in order to deflect attention away from his criminal conduct on his younger brother. At trial, defense learned for the first time that victim-nephew Sychar was preoccupied with porn. Victim-nephew testified that he watched porn before he ever decided to abuse brother (younger brother was sexually abused three times by Sychar), and was thinking about porn when he forced younger brother to suck his penis on June 12, 2007. Client maintained his innocence with his first attorney, second attorney and with me. I did not acquire the case until Novermber, 2009 (more than two years after his arrest).

CASE: State of Georgia v. Warren O'Neil Clarke (10SC087303)

RESULT: (February, 2010) Three day jury trial on three counts of first degree forgery resulted in directed verdicts on counts two and three (not enough evidence to even go to the jury for its consideration), and NOT GUILTY on count one.

FACTS: Client accused of using forged checks to pay for car parts at a local dealership. Client supposedly used a fake New York driver's license when he presented forged checks. The prosecutor had no witness to testify about New York driver's license and not witness to testify about presentment of second check. So, two of the three forgery counts never reached the jury. As to count one, the jury deliberaed five hours and decided NOT GUILTY.

BEST PART OF THE CASE: First, my request for a continuance the Thursday before trial was denied. Therefore, the case was tried four days after I came into the case.  Second, the prosecutor somehow stumbled through a McCullough motion, and managed to get the first jury of seven blacks and five whites thrown out, only to try the case to a jury of eight whites and four blacks. Still NOT GUILTY.  

CASE: State of Georgia v. Kenneth Anthony Jones ( 07B-4449-10)

RESULT: (November 2009) Five day jury trial on one count of rape, one count of incest, two counts of child molestation, one count of aggravated sodomy and one count of aggravated sexual battery. Jury deliberated for forty-five minutes, and returned NOT GUILTY verdict on all counts.

FACTS: Client arrested after daughter Tierra Jones alleges that he raped her multiples times over a twenty month period. After a four year delay, the prosecutor was finally ready to go forward with the jury trial.  After the first jury is selected, but not sworn, "victim" indicated that she did not want to testify against her father.  The proseutor immediately granted the "victim" immunity from prosecution, and requested that she be jailed for failure to testify.  The "victim" was jailed at the Gwinnett County Detention Center (GCDC) for two days, after which time she explained under oath that she lied, and her father never molested her.  A second Jury was selected the week of November 9th to hear the case.  Although the "victim" was insiting that nothing ever happened, and that she lied, the prosecutor charged forward.  The prosecutor objected to the defense cross-examining the "victim" by playing her prior recorded statements for the jury, while she was on the witness stand.  The prosecutor then presented an expert witness from Gwinnett Sexual Assult Center (GSAC) to testify that the vagina/hymen of a virgin may look exactly the same as the vagina/hymen of a woman raped everyday for two years, by three different men.  Needless to say that medical evidence stemmed from the fact that the "victim" vagina/hymen showed no signs of trauma.  Very little evidence in the case, but a grat deal of advocacy by the witnesses.  The jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all of the charges after only forty-five minutes.  The jury had no questions, and did not ask to see any of the "victim" two DVD recorded statements.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Jameel Terry Hazel (09B-1827-9)

RESULT: (July, 2009) Four-day jury trial ended in mistrial after lead detective testifies about show-up, which judge specifically excluded from the jury's consideration. Immediately after the mistrial, negotiations with the prosecutor resulted in a guilty pleas to the lesser offense of robbery by intimidation. Client received a sentence of six (6) years in prison, to be followed by nine years on probation. Client is eligible for parole in four (4) years. 

FACTS: Two black young males enter laundromat, wearing masks, pointing a gun and demanding money. The lone occupant of the laundromat open both offices and the register. They take the money and run off. A few monents later a maintenance person in a nearby apartment complex sees two persons ran into an apartment, where the occupants are scheduled to be evicted. When the police roll into the area, the maintenance person lets the police know what he saw, and police go directly to the apartment. As one of the co-defendants opens the door for the police, my client and one of the co-defendants jump off the balcony. After all three are taken to the precinct, my client makes a full confession on DVD.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Alberto Ramon Santana (09B-1267-1)

RESULT: (April, 2009) Five-day jury trial on three counts of armed robberty, four counts of aggravated assault, one count of burglary and two counts of cruelty to children resulted in NOT GUILTY on all charges.

FACTS: This is a Jerry Springer scenario, so you may have to create a flow chart to keep abreast of all the players.  Shakyra Gilliams aka Tiffany aka KaKa aka"T" gets drunk and visits her baby's daddy (Austin Thompson).  Austin Thompson lives with Nadine Felder; and Shakyra Gillams is driven to the house by Mercedes Wilson.  While Shakyra Gilliams makes her drunken pleas for Austin Thompson (who is present in the house with at least two other girls) to return to her, ghetto-fabulous Nadine Felder, who is present at the house, decides to tell Mercedes Wilsonn that she cannot park her vehicle in driveway of Nadine's duplex.  Before ghettoo-favulous Mercedes Wilson moves her vehicle from the driveway, she decides to let Nadine Felder know that a duplex is not a real house (i.e. detached single family).  As Shakyra Gilliams pines for Austin Thompson, the animosity between Nadine Felder and Mercedes Wilson grows.  Mercedes Wilson is trying to get drunk Shakyra  Gilliams back into the vehicle, and phones my client, Alberto Santana, for help getting Shakyra Gilliams back into the car.  Alberto Santana arrives, solely for the purpose of helping diffuse the situation, when Nadine Felder turns her vehement diatribe against Alberto.  Alberto continues to try and maintain calm, until Nadine Felder strikes him with a brick, rock or "boulder" (testimony of one of the armed robbery victims).  Although angry abourt being styruck, Alberto manages to get both Mercedes and Shakyra into Mercedes vehicle; and the vehicle leaves, but not before either Mercedes, Alberto or both (depending on which trial testimony you believe) shout to Nadine that "they are going to return, kick in doors and lay everyone in the house down".  Laying everyone in the house down means to return and shoot people.

Approximately twenty-four hours later, three perpetrators, two armed with guns, forcibly enter Nadine Felder's house by kicking in the back door.  At the time of the home invasion theere were three adults (Nadine Felder, Sherwin Andrews and Arriane Theophile) and two children (both Nadine's children) in the home.  Afther the three men enter the duplex, one stands lookout, one begins to rummage thru the duplex and one begins to strike Sherwin Andrews in the head with a pistol.  Although Sherwin Andrews was present for the drama the previous day, Sherwin Andrews had no cross words with either Mercedes Wilson or Alberto Santana.  During the five to ten minute home invasion, approximately $80-100 dollars was taken, and some cell phones.  Nadine Felder thought she recognized one of the perpetrators as Alberto, and told the 911 operator his name on the night of the robbery on the 911 call.  Nadine Felder again mentioned his name when she was interviewed by police the night of the home invasion.  Arianne Theophile did not wait for the police to arrive that night, but did select Alberto from a sex-person photo line-up approximately three weeks later.  Fortunately for Alberto, the victim who was struck numerous times (Sherwin Andrews) testified that he got a good look at the lookout (person near the back door) and it could not have been Alberto because the height, weight and build were all wrong.  After six hours of deliberation, the jury agreed with Sherwin Andrews.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Eric Butler           (07B-3616-10 

RESULT: (October, 2008) Three day jury trial on sole charge of deposit account fraud, resulted in a NOT GUILTY verdict.

FACTS: See RACISM

CASE: State of Georgia v. Larry C. Cornelius (07B-1663-7)

RESULT: (May 2008) Four day jury trial on counts of armed robbery, aggravated assault and possession of a firearm, resulted in NOT GUILTY on all charges.

FACTS: Client is arranging a second purchase of marijuana from the victim/drug dealer. There are phone calls back and forth between the client and victim, with the last call coming about ten minutes before the shooting. The victim arrives at the client's apartment complex and allows three black males to get into his vehicle, one of whom directs the victim to drive to the back of the complex. After the vehicle stops, the front seat passenger gets out of the vehicle, and walks around the front of the vehicle. As the front seat passenger, whom the victim identifies at jury trial as my client, is walking around the front of the vehicle, one of the rear seat passengers pulls a gun and put it to the victim's head. The person on the outside of the car opens the driver's side door and takes the victim's money. While the driver's side door is open, the victim jumps out to the vichicle and is shot five times, after which he drives himself to his father's home.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Ronald Earl Young (08B-1717-6)

RESULT: (March 2008) Four day jury trial on counts of burglary, aggravated assault, cruelty to children (two counts), giving a false name and possession of marijuana, resulted in NOT GUILTY on charges of burglary, aggravated assault and cruelty to children.

FACTS: Client is stopped while walking through his neighborhood, because he is suspected of entering a woman's house, taking cash and jewelry, and striking her with a metal rod before fleeing her apartment. No one sees the burglar, except for the victim. There are no fingerprints left at the scene. The client foolishly gives a false name (because he is on probation) and has a little bit of marijuana in his pocket. Although the woman identified my client at the jury trial as the burglar, the jury found him NOT GUILTY on all of the charges associated with the burglary.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Antwaune Torrece Tillman (07B-5146-9

RESULT: (April 2008) Five day jury trial on a twenty(20) counts indictment, which included eight counts of armed robbery, seven counts of kidnapping, three counts of possession of a firearm, one count of possession of marijuana and one count of giving a false name. Before the jury trial began, eight counts were dismissed. After the jury deliberated for approximately four hours on the other twelve charges, my client was found NOT GUILTY of another nine counts, including four armed robbery, four kidnapping and one count of possession of a fireamrm. Unfortunately, my client was found guilty of one count of armed robbery, one count of kidnapping and one count of possession of a firearm. The judge sentenced my client to thirty years in prison, to be followed by fifteen years on probation. Appeal is pending.

FACTS: A string of robberies that include two dry clearners, two Metro PCS stores and a bridal shop during a thirty day period of time is solved when a woman recognizes one of the robbers leaving a Metro PCS from high school.  Her tip leads to the arrest of a co-defendant, who eventually confesses to participating in all of the robberies. In the process of "coming to Jesus" the co-defendant implicates my client in th earmed robberies, which result in my client's arrest. There is little evidence, except the word of the co-defendant. Therefore, the jury finds my client NOT GUILTY of the bridal shop robbery (the two dry cleaner robberies having been dismissed before the jury trial even began). The jury finds my client guilty of robbing one of the Metro PCS stores because of a palm print located on the glass countertop, where the robber allegedly brace himself when he hurdled over the counter. Appeal pending.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Michael Lawrence Jones (08B-1475-4)

RESULT: (March 2008) Three day jury trial on two counts of arson and two counts of burglary, resulted in NOT GUILTY verdict on all charges. 

FACTS: Client's mother supposedly receives a phone call at work from son (client) exclaiming that he has done something "very bad" to her home. Client's mother leaves work early, drives home and finds her home engulfed in flames. She hangs up and phone 911 to request fire engine. Fire investigator interviews mother a few hours later, and learns that the mother believe son (client) s, set fire.  Interview with mother recorded.  A few weeks later, client's ex-girlfriend gives a recorded interview, claiming that client told her that he burned down mother's house. Photos presented to jury indicate that there is extensive damage to mother's premises. Expert testimony establishes that the fire was an arson. However, mother has changed her position concerning whom she thinks may have burned her home. 

CASE: State of Georgia v. Keith Clark  (06B-3044-2)