Recent Trials Won by Lawrence Lewis

In Order to find a list of cases handled in Gwinnett County:

(1) Click on Gwinnett County website:      http://www.gwinnettcourts.com/casesearch/byattorney.aspx

(2) Insert my name into the space provided. Last name LEWIS first, and then first  name LAWRENCE

(3) Insert filing dates into the space provided. I recommend 04/01/00 to    04/01/14. More than four thousand (4000) records will appear, because I have handled more than three thousand five hundred cases during that fourteen (14) year period

(4) Now you can choose from any of the four thousand cases to see how I have handled the cases, or confirm the following list of recent victories:

CASE: State of Georgia v. Demetrin Robert Patterson (19-B-04098-2). 

RESULT: (December, 2019) Four day jury trial on two counts of aggravated stalking.  Jury deliberated and returned NOT GUILTY verdict on aggravated stalking, and found client guilty of misdemeanor offense of violation of domestic violence order.  With credit for time served, client was released from the Gwinnett County Detention Center (GCDC) the same night. 

FACTS: Client meets a woman on social media site Facebook when he is living in North Carolina.  They communicate for a while, and she encourages him to relocate, and live with her and her son.  He moves from North Carolina to Lawrenceville, Georgia, and begins working and learning about his new girlfriend.  Things begin to go sideways in the relationship, and she procures a TPO (temporary protection order), forgetting to put in the order that my client tried to electrocute her in a tub of water (she remembered that little fact for the jury trial).  AFTER the judge grants the TPO, she invites him back to the residence, and he accepts.  Things again go sideways after about two months later, and she calls the police again, claiming that he cut her panties off of her body to check for bodily fluids of another man.  When the police arrive, they refuse to take a warrant for aggravated stalking, because she invited him back to the house, but he is arrested for simple battery.  AFTER about a month in jail, client pleads guilty to the simple battery, in order to get out of jail, and goes back over to the residence to inquire about the relationship.  After he knocks on the door and leaves, police arrive and arrest him for aggravated stalking.  He has violated the TPO, which is still in effect, and the sentencing order on the misdemeanor simple battery, which reads that he should not have any contact with the woman.  The prosecutor charges (or overcharges) him two counts of aggravated stalking for just knocking on the front door.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Torey Glenn Richardson (18-B-03833-2). 

RESULT: (December, 2019) Three day jury trial on one count of home invasion, two counts of armed robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, two counts of false imprisonment, one count of financial transaction card theft and one count of transaction card fraud.  Because client had three felony convictions, he faced recidivist punishment, which means IF was found guilty on a home invasion or armed robbery count, the judge had no option but to sentence the client to life without the possibility of parole.  Client found NOT GUILTY of all charges, expect the financial transaction card fraud, where he was caught on camera inside of the QT removing money from the ATM after the home invasion/armed robbery victim’s ATM card was used.  Client was sentenced to the maximum of two (2) years in prison.  Because he has been in custody for seventeen (17) months, he has only seven more months in jail.   

FACTS: Client is arrested, accused of home invasion and armed robbery, because he appears on surveillance video at the QT using the victim’s credit card relatively soon after the home invasion is completed.  Four males are arrested, including my client.  Two enter guilty pleas to ten years in prison (the mandatory minimum punishment for an armed robbery), and testify against my client at jury trial.  There were a total of six (6) witnesses: two victims, two co-defendants and two investigators.  No fingerprints, scientific evidence (e.g. blood, saliva, semen), surveillance videos, or cell phone tower records that place my client inside of the residence where the home invasion occurs.  Jury returns a seventy-five (75) minute verdict.     

MORAL: Mr. Richardson was one of two cases tried in December, 2019 where I replaced another attorney.  In Richardson’s case, his prior attorney had the case for more than fourteen (14) months, before I entered the case, and insisted on a jury trial.  IF you are not comfortable with your attorney, DO NOT go before a jury with that attorney. 

CASE: State of Georgia v. Frank Garcia Reyes (19-B-00414-6). 

RESULT: (February, 2019) Three day jury trial on one count of aggravated assault and one count of family violence battery.  A total of eight (8) witnesses (i.e. victim, her three friends, four law enforcement officers) testified against my client.  Jury deliberated and returned NOT GUILTY verdict on all counts.

FACTS: Client is arrested, accused of slashing his girlfriend with a piece of a mirror that he pushed her into.  Client and girlfriend begin drinking before they head out to the club, where they consume more alcohol.  Because she had a number of issues (e.g. liver failure, meth addiction, mental health issues, blackout episodes, felony probation), the girlfriend should not have been consuming alcohol at all.  Client’s girlfriend testified that when she went to the club with client and her girlfriend, she was uninterested in hanging out with my client.  She wanted to meet some new guys.  Because my client had too much to drink, he reacted poorly to being discarded at the club, which resulted in drunken and disorderly conduct.  However, he denied committing any acts of domestic violence 

CASE: State of Georgia v. Melvin Tararez (18-B-02710-3).  

RESULT: (February, 2019) Three day jury trial on one count of aggravated assault, family violence battery.  Jury deliberated and returned NOT GUILTY verdict on sole count. 

FACTS: Client is arrested, accused of threatening his girlfriend with a machete, and swinging the weapon at her.  Clearly client and his girlfriend are having domestic issues, but there is no evidence that she has been harmed in any way.  At the time of the alleged offense, the client was helping neighbor with yardwork, and had no alcohol on his breath.  Girlfriend made allegations because it was easier to end relationship with police removing boyfriend from the home. 

MORAL: Many of the domestic issues in 2019 are the result of each party trying to change his/her partner into something closer to what they expect a partner to be.  As the partner resists the external demands to change, domestic issues escalate, and eventually police are called to referee the relationship. 

CASE: State of Georgia v. Patrice Morin (18-B-04114-1).  

RESULT: (March, 2019) Four day jury trial on one count of Trafficking Methamphetamine and one count of Manufacturing Methamphetamine.  Client of girlfriend that shared motel room with client testified against client, claiming she was unaware of what drugs were in the motel room where she slept.  Jury deliberated and returned NOT GUILTY verdict on all counts.  

FACTS: Client is arrested in another county three hours from Gwinnett County, and charged with drug offenses for methamphetamine located in a motel room in Gwinnett County.  The room was registered to the girlfriend, and the prosecutor failed to produce any witnesses, other than the girlfriend, that ever placed my client near the motel room, which contributed to the verdict against the state.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Omayeli J. Amuka-Pemu (#17B-01942-3)

RESULTS: (February, 2018) Client charged with five (5) felony counts of Financial Transaction Card Theft and one misdemeanor Obstruction of Law Enforcement Officer. Client reported to court for calendar calls for more than one year, and argued all pre-trial motions.  In the middle of jury selection, the prosecutor DISMISSED all charges.

FACTS: Client picks up a friend, who may or may not be selling drugs, and is pulled over by the police for an investigative detention.  Client refuses to cooperate with the police by showing his driver`s license (as required by O.C.G.A. 40-5-29), which leads to a search of the vehicle, and discovery of suspicious debit cards.  In reality, the cards are not stolen or being used without anyone`s permission, but they never become an issue, IF client does not pretend to know "his legal rights" and just hand over his driver`s license.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Gerald Randy White (#17B-04879-6)

RESULTS: (January, 2018) Client charged with one count of Aggravated Battery, two counts of Aggravated Stalking and one count of Aggravated Assault against his girlfriend after three separated domestic violence incidents.  Client found NOT GUILTY of all charges related to the latter two incidents with his girlfriend, but found guilty of the one count of Aggravated Battery, where he bit a piece of her index finger off.  Client was sentenced to ten years in prison to be followed by ten years on probation.  However, considering the plea offer from the prosecutor was eight years in prison to be followed by twenty-two years on probation, the client only received two more years in prison for going to a jury trial.

FACTS: Client and girlfriend are in a tumultuous relationship.  They meet at a gas station in passing, and she moves in with him in less than thirty (30) days.  In the first incident, she is poking client in the face when he snaps at her finger and bites a piece of her finger clean off.  [Clearly, it was hard for the jury to vote NOT  GUILTY on the aggravated battery, when they can clearly see that a piece of her finger is missing.]  Client and girlfriend then hook up again after he bonds out, and end up in a vehicular accident, which she claims five months later is staking, even though she did not mention anything to the responding officer about being scared of my client (her boyfriend).  Client is arrested again, when he comes home drunk, and she phones the police alleging that he is stalking her.  Client had text messages (sexting), and photos of girlfriend`s vagina which were forwarded to him after he was to have no contact with her, which was AFTER she loss a piece of her finger.  So, the jury got the part AFTER she loss the finger exactly right when they found him NOT GUILTY of those four (4) charges.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Kamal Rahmann Craig (#16B-01802-10)

RESULTS: (January, 2017) Client charged with Armed Robbery, Aggravated Assault and Possession of Firearm, after an alleged armed robbery, where client invites and unsuspecting acquaintance to his residence under the guise of selling a gun/drugs, and robs the acquaintance.  The case was tried to a jury in January, 2017, and resulted in a HUNG JURY.  Seven jurors believed that the physically intimidating client robbed much smaller victim at point of gun.  Five jurors recognized that the client would never need a gun to take what he wanted from the alleged victim.  The case was supposed to be retried to a jury sometime in 2018, but turned into a plea to the lesser offense of Robbery.

RESULTS: (December, 2017) Client pled to the lesser included offense of Robbery, and an unrelated VGCSA: Possession of Cocaine (#17B-02250-10), and was sentenced to three years in prison, with and additional seven years on probation.  The expectation is that the client will parole out of prison AFTER serving only two years, when he was facing a mandatory minimum ten years in prison on the Armed Robbery.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Shelby Andre McKenzie (#17B-02112-10)

RESULTS: (September, 2017) Client charged with two counts of Aggravated Assault against his girlfriend after a domestic violence incident, where he admits to police that he struck his girlfriend in the face.  The plea offer of two years in prison was rejected, and a speedy trial demand was filed.  One count of aggravated assault (chasing complainant with knife) was dismissed at the close of the state`s case on the defense`s demurrer motion.  They jury returned a NOT GUILTY verdict on the second aggravated assault (choking complainant with his hands) offense, instead opting for the lesser included offense of misdemeanor battery. So, two aggravated assault charges, where client was facing forty (404) years in prison turned into one misdemeanor, where he received twelve (12) months on probation.

FACTS: Client and girlfriend are in a tumultuous relationship.  They meet at workplace (i.e. fast food joint), and move in together in less than sixty (60) days. She convinces my client to support her while she goes to school.  So, when my client in NOT working, he is caring for her one year old (baby`s daddy is in the wind).  When she thinks she is pregnant, she tells everyone but my client, who begins to have suspicions.  When he asks her to take a pregnancy test, the girlfriend reveals that she has had an abortion, so she is no longer pregnant.  There is an argument, but very little physical contact.   The next day, the girlfriend locks him out the apartment because she is mad a him.  When she allows him in the apartment, she is on FaceTime giggling with her friends.  Client gets angry and throws cell phone out of the window.  Client indicates that he struck girlfriend in the face at that time.  Girlfriend gives thee most gruesome account of multiple beatings, and suspicions that she was going to be killed.  Of course, the physical evidence supported my client`s version, which is why the jury returned a misdemeanor verdict.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Ashante Elder Stokes (#16B-03164-5)

RESULTS: (August, 2017) With speedy trial demand still in place, the defendant was tried a second time for one count of rape before a jury, which resulted in a NOT GUILTY verdict.

FACTS: ALL FACTS were the same as the first trial.  However, the state elected not to present any of the inconclusive DNA evidence at the second jury trial.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Homer Theodore Reynolds (#17-B-00511-2)

RESULTS: (June, 2017) After filing a speedy trial demand on a Wednesday, the defendant was on trial for felony Family Violence Battery, the very next Monday (five days later). The defendant`s sister and grandmother testified that the family was highly dysfunctional, and the defendant did not assault anyone. After less than thirty (30) minutes of deliberation, the defendant was found NOT GUILTY of the felony Family Violence Battery charge, but was found guilty of one misdemeanor count of obstruction for running from the police.

FACTS: Client came to the grandmother`s residence because someone called him to the house when folks at the house were fighting.  Grandmother had to admit on the stand that all of the family members like to argue loud and get physical.  During a physical altercation between the sister and someone else, the sister suffered a small injury to her lip.  Grandmother phoned the police, and allegedly said grandson caused the injury without seeing who caused the injury.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Ashante Elder Stokes (#16-B-03164-5)

RESULTS: (May, 2017) After filing a speedy trial demand, the defendant was tried for one count of rape before a jury, which resulted in a hung jury. After a week-long jury trial, a mistrial was declared after the jury indicated it was hopelessly deadlocked at 7-5. The initial jury note indicated that the count was 5-5-2, which meant there were five voting to convict, five voting to acquit and two that were undecided, which is the epitome of a hung jury. So, the case will need to be tried before another jury.

FACTS: Client, who is black, was socializing with some folks that have been in rehab for drugs and /or alcohol.  Everyone was drinking, but denied any drug use.  After hours of hard drinking, the complainant`s sex partner (because she denied he was her boyfriend, even though his semen was located in her cervix) goes to bed in the complainant`s grandmother`s bed.  The complainant, who is highly intoxicated, joins him shortly thereafter.  The complainant alleged she awakes to my client, whose DNA is nowhere to be found, thrusting his penis in and out of her vagina.  She had no idea of how her panties were removed, and the non-boyfriend, who was on the same bed during this "rape", heard and saw nothing.  The complainant and her BFF argued to the police and the jury that my client must be found guilty because the white complainant is a racist and would never voluntarily sleep with a black man.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Eugene Smalls (#16SC144905)

RESULTS: (April, 2017) Client was charged with one count of rape.  After a week-long jury trial, the jury found client NOT GUILTY.  Client was immediately released from the Fulton County Jail, where he had been incarcerated for more than fourteen (14) months for missing a court date.

FACTS: Client met a girl working at the strip club Stokers, and invites her to his place.  Since there is no rule against fraternizing with the patrons of the strip club, she visits my client at his residence.  He says the sex was consensual, and she was angry about not being immediately paid for sex.  She says the sex was nonconsensual.  The jury trial was replete with gems.  First, the 911 operator tells the complainant, who has left Atlanta, that the complainant will need to return to Atlanta in order to speak to police, and the complainant cannot understand why she must return to the scene of the rape, even though the 911 operator tells her she can go to any precinct.  Second, the complainant explains that the only reason she was working at the strip club, without her brother`s or mother`s knowledge, was so she could catch and embarrass her father, who was divorcing her mother and spending the family`s money at the strip club.  She testified that she saw the strip club information on a credit card receipt, but the strip club only accepts cash.  Third, the complainant could NOT answer one defense question with a direct answer.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Keith Joshua Mejia (#16-B-04063-4)

RESUSTS: (February, 2017) After filing a speedy trial demand, the defendant was tried for one felony count of terroristic threats, and three misdemeanors related to a fight with a friend`s mother`s paramour.  After a two and a half day jury trial, the defendant was found NOT GUILTY of the felony terroristic threats, and guilty of only the misdemeanors. The defendant was sentenced to thirty-six months in work release, which will allow him to work, get counseling and build a constructive life. He will be able to return to court, and get the time in work release reduced after he demonstrates to the judge that he is on a more constructive path.

FACTS: Client ha a fight with his best friend`s stepfather at the best friend`s house.  The best friend was suspected of being a gang member, and was in jail at the time of the physical fight between my client and the stepfather.  The stepfather was visiting the best friend`s mother, who we learned during the jury trial was sleeping with both the stepfather and my client (you cannot make this stuff up).  There was a physical confrontation, and the stepfather lost the fight.  The issue was in the end was there enough evidence to convict my client of making threats towards the stepfather when the client was being arrested and dragged from the house.  The police alleged the threats were captured on dash cam or body cam, but none were ever produced.

NOTE: This case was tried the same week as Tonee Lamont Gregory. 

CASE: State of Georgia v. Tonee Lamont Gregory (#16-B-04200-5)

RESULTS: (February, 2017) After filing a speedy trial demand, the defendant was tried for one felony count of aggravated assault, and two misdemeanor battery offenses related to a physical confrontation with his girlfriend.  The defendant was found NOT guilty of aggravated assault, which carried a potential twenty years in prison, and was found guilty of three misdemeanor charges related to the physical altercation.  The judge gave the defendant the maximum thirty-six (36) months in custody, but the defendant receives two for one credit, so the client will only do eighteen (18) months, and then is free to move to Virginia, leaving all of the bad memories of the relationship behind.

FACTS: Client was released from prison, and offered a place to live with a female friend, who appeared to be habitually unhappy about his employment and level of gratitude.  There eventually was a physical altercation between the two, who of course were sleeping with one another, where she suffered a small scrape on her neck, which she attributed to being strangled to the point of losing consciousness.  Given her testimony and the photos, the jury got it exactly right.

NOTE: This case was tried the same week as Keith Joshua Mejia.  First time I ever had two felony jury trials in one week; and first time I ever had two felony juries find clients NOT GUILTY of all felony charges.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Adam Hannah (#16-B-02288-10)

RESULTS: (September, 2016) After filing a speedy trial demand, the defendant agreed to a bench trial, at the prosecutor`s request. The two felony terroristic threat charges did not survive a directed verdict, meaning there was not enough evidence for the trier of fact to even consider the charges. The defendant was found guilty of two counts of misdemeanor Battery, one for each of his parents. Client was sentenced to eighteen (18) months in custody, which really becomes nine (9) months, because he gets two days credit for every on day served; and with credit for time served, client will be out in a maximum of four (4) months.

FACTS: Client, who has been diagnosed as bipolar, had a disagreement with his biological mother, who was arguing with his brother. During the disagreement, my client supposedly struck the mother, and the father who intervened, with his fists, but no one is seriously injured.

MORAL: Even metal health patients need to go to trial sometimes.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Desmond Lamont Chapman (#16-B-01490-8)

RESULTS: (June, 2016) After the defense filed a statutory speedy trial demand, client received a jury trial within four and a half months of his arrest on a residential burglary charges. Three day jury trial where I referred to everyone that was not a police officer as a dirtbag or a vagabum. After less than three hours of deliberation, the jury returned a NOT GUILTY verdict on the sole count of Burglary in the first degree.

FACTS: Client, who has two felony convictions and multiple run-ins with the law, begins to work for a shady handyman when client is recently released from jail. Handyman is looking for the cheapest day laborers he can find, and client is looking to earn money without working any harder than necessary.  Handyman likes to pay his workers in food, and they like to scheme to try and figure out how they are going to take advantage of him. Everyone is a vagabum (my term). Handyman`s home is burglarized, and one of his employees (co-defendant in the burglary) is seen on video pawning some of the jewelry (the pawn shop owner is a dirtbag also). Unfortunately for my client, he is seen entering the pawn shop and trying to pawn some of the very items that the pawn shop owner refused to purchase from the co-defendant. Client is charged with the burglary, rather than theft by receiving, because the burglary victim (handyman) finds a shirt on the floor, which he believes belongs to my client. 

MORAL: (1) Prosecutors will try anything to a jury, even IF the victim is a dirtbag; and (2) You cannot use the "retarded" in polite company anymore, it is now officially the "r" word.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Jonathan David Rodas (#15-B-04215-7)

RESULTS: (March, 2016) (April, 2016) Two back-to-back jury trials on three counts of Armed Robbery, each of which carries a mandatory minimum sentence of ten (10) years in prison, and a maximum possible sentence of life in prison, which means thirty (30) years before you are eligible for parole. The first trial results in on NOT GUILTY on an armed robbery, one DISMISSAL of an armed robbery and on HUNG JURY on an armed robbery. The prosecutor immediately turns around to try the HUNG JURY (not all 12 jurors could agree on a verdict) count of armed robbery, and a second jury finds my client NOT GUILTY of the armed robbery charge.

FACTS: Client, who is believed to be a gang member is accused of robbing three different people in two different incidents.  In the first incident, a Hispanic painter is beaten up in some type of silly disagreement, before my client allegedly appears on the scene with a gun, and takes his money at gunpoint. In the second incident, a Hispanic guy and his girlfriend are in a vehicle, when they see my guy and two other guys peering into vehicles. The guy, who admits that he has had six or more beers over a four hour period of time, gets into a physical confrontation when a gun is pulled on him by supposedly my client. M client takes his wallet an leaves the scene.

MORAL: Even IF you are illegal you deserve proper representation.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Martin David Baber (#14-B-0342-3)

RESULTS: (February, 2015) After the defense filed a statutory speedy trial demand in September, 2014, the prosecutor was unable to produce the necessary witnesses before the end of February, 2015, and all charges had to be DISMISSED.

FACTS: Client had disagreement with mother and brother. During the disagreement, my client supposedly made threats, and brandished a knife, but no one is ever cut, stabbed or injured. Because client is on probation, there is a probation hold, preventing client from getting out of jail, until all the charges are dismissed.

MORAL: Sometimes patience in NOT a virtue. So, file a speedy trial demand on your criminal case.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Rocio Vasquez-Vega (#14-B-2968-10)

RESULTS: (February, 2015) After the defense dropped a statutory speedy trial demand in November, 2014, the pressure was placed on the state prosecutor to try the trafficking methamphetamine case before the end of February, 2015. However, the trafficking charges put on my client were only a small part of a larger, six-month were investigation, where the federal judge allegedly refused to release discovery (e.g. police reports, photos, recorded conversations from the wire, etc.) in the case. Client, who has an ICE hold, was originally charged with Trafficking Methamphetamine (61 pounds of meth), Manufacturing Methamphetamine, and four counts of Presence of Children During the Manufacturing of Methamphetamine. Because law enforcement pulled 61 pounds of meth from the same house where my client was residing, she faced a mandatory minimum twenty-five (25) years in prison. Within twenty-four (24) hours of receiving discovery client was allowed to plead to three counts of Presence of Children During the Manufacturing of Methamphetamine, and was sentenced to one (1) year in prison, to be followed by nine (9) years on probation.  because client has spent more than seven and a half (7.5) months in jail, for which she receives credit, client should be paroled in the next few weeks. in the worse-case scenario, she will max out in four (4) months.

FACTS: Thirty-five year old client, who has worked in the same restaurant for more than eleven (11) years is forced to leave her employment because of complications with her pregnancy.  Although the boyfriend (baby`s dad) is in the picture, he is unable to provide money to help client maintain her apartment for herself and her now three children. So, client loses apartment, and is forced to reside with the baby`s daddy, baby daddy`s sister and her husband. Client is oblivious to methamphetamine production at the residence, until the police kick in the door, chasing a co-defendant through the house. Law enforcement pull a boatload of meth out of the house and charge every adult living in the house.

MORAL: The right attorney can make all the difference in your case.  While my client will be out of jail in the next few weeks, the co-defendants may be housed at the jail for the another sex (6) to nine (9) months before there is any real movement on their cases. 

CASE: State of Georgia v. Yancey Axon (#13SC120313)

RESULTS: (February, 2015)  After eighteen (18) months of negotiations, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the charge from Armed Robbery to Robbery,  and the judge sentenced client to five years in prison suspended upon entry and successful completion of boot camp, followed by fifteen (15) years on probation, all under the first offender program.  If client completes ninety (90) days boot camp without a problem, he will only have to deal with probation and the myriad of conditions while on probation.

FACTS: Young, diminutive eighteen year old, inspired by a knavish co-defendant pulls gun on young woman as she was approaching her vehicle, and takes the vehicle at gunpoint.  Both young males are apprehended and the vehicle is recovered in less than an hour. Co-defendant admits to his participation in the armed robbery, and describes my client`s role in the armed robbery.

MORAL: IF you are fortunate enough to get a bond on a seven deadly case (e.g. armed robbery, rape, aggravated child molestation, aggravated sodomy, etc.), you need to be gainfully employed AND actively involved in some educational endeavor, in order to persuade the prosecutor and the trial judge that the behavior leading to the criminal charge is an anomaly, and you are proactively involved in improving yourself. 

CASE: State of Georgia v. Kwame James Gordon (#S2182777-01)

RESULTS: (January, 2015) After a one day jury trial, client found NOT GUILTY of all four charges, related to the domestic incident between client and his live-in girlfriend.

FACTS: Client returns home from an evening of parting/drinking to find his girlfriend upset. There is a physical exchange between the two, where the girlfriend is struck in the face and has a bruise to her cheek, and my client is cut in the face with a hair trimmer, requiring 20+ stitches. In the early morning hours, immediately after the incident, the police respond and arrest my client, who explained that he was injured at the club, not at the house, in order to avoid having his girlfriend arrested and taken to jail.  After my client is treated at the hospital, he is arrested.

MORAL: The prosecutor will go forward with a jury trial (will the 911 tape and the responding police officer), even when the domestic violence victim fails to show up for the jury trial.  After realizing that the was NOT in court, the prosecutor announced that he would be going forward without a victim. In fact, he did go forward, but had a hard time refuting the self-defense claim proffered by the defense.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Everette Romondo Daniels (#14B-1855-4)

RESULTS: (November, 2014) After a four day jury trial, client found NOT GUILTY of all charges, which included Rape, Aggravated Sodomy and False Imprisonment.

FACTS: Forty-five year old client, who is in alcohol rehab at the time he meets his woman, decides to leave alcohol rehab early in order to pursue relationship with a woman who is twelve years his senior.  After dating for only three months, they decide to get a house together, because neither one has a steady place to reside, and she wants a house.  Two months after they begin living together, they begin to occupy separate bedrooms and he resumes his drinking.  Only God knows IF the drinking caused the difficulties, or was a response to the difficulties.

In her statement to the detective and the jury, the complainant/fiancé explained that she felt compelled to leave the house every weekend in January, 2014, because when client drank he was loud, obnoxious and crazy.  Although they were passing each other in the house, as each worked a different shift in January, the complainant decided the weekend of February 8, 2014, while she was coming down with a cold, to work on the relationship, a rapprochement of sorts.  It began with voluntary sex at 4:00 a.m. on February 8th and continued with her drinking vodka with client on the evening of February 8th.  At approximately 2:00 a.m. on February 9th, after they have finished an entire bottle of vodka, my client goes to bed in the master bedroom.   The complainant testified she only had a pinch of liquor, and never saw my client drink the whole bottle, despite the fact that they were talking in the kitchen the entire time he was drinking the vodka.  According to the victim, after she confronted my client about drinking all of the cold medicine, he jumped up out of bed and started punching her in the face and chest.  My client then supposedly had her strip and raped her in missionary position and doggy style, all the while threatening to strangle her with the cord from a hair dryer.  During the assault, the entirety of which was only fifteen minutes, he also demanded that she perform oral sex on him.  Photos taken after the alleged assault, revealed absolutely no injuries other than a bite mark on her check a minute scratch on her chest.  The photos from the Gwinnett Sexual Assault Center (GSAC) revealed no trauma to the vaginal area.  I suspect the bite mark came during voluntary sex, because the complainant told the detective that when my client bit her and she bit him back.  Her story was continually evolving and changing.  I suspect that is why the jury had a hard time believing it.

SUMMARY: Two dysfunction people trying to use each other to feel normal.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Hung Binh Huy (#12D-4006-5)

RESULTS: (January, 2013) After a two day jury trial, client found NOT GUILTY on both charges of Reckless Conduct and Pointing a Gun at Another. 

FACTS: Client, who does not speak much English, observes some strangers peering over his fence when the client responds to the barking dogs in his yard.  Concerned that the strangers may create drama for his wife and grandchild in the house, client leaves his house with his .38 in his pocket.  Client walks along the outside of his six foot fence and confronts the strangers while still on his property.  Client testified that he told them, in broken English, to not go in his yard, and moved the gun from his jacket pocket to his waistband, never pointing the gun at anyone.  Conversely, the tree removal contractors, who were supposedly at the location pursuant to a work order from Georgia Power, called the police and alleged that my client pointed the gun at them.  At trial, the testimony from the two contractors contained multiple contradictions about where everyone was standing when the gun was supposedly pointed.  In the end, the jury reached the right verdict.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Derrick Gillis (# 12C-48855-7A)  

RESULTS: (December, 2012) One day domestic violence jury trial that prosecutor insisted on trying.  There were six charges, including two counts of Family Violence Battery, one count of Simple Battery and two counts of Cruelty to Children.  The jury returned a verdict in fourteen (14) minutes: NOT GUILTY on all charges.  The absolute right results in the case.  

FACTS: Frustrated husband/client asks wife about missing computer speakers, only to locate them in his stepson’s bedroom.  Client and wife argue about client’s threats towards stepson, who is not even present at the house.  Wife testifies at trial under oath that she put her finger in client’s face, and client pushes finger out of his face.  When he pushed the finger out of his face, the wife’s fingernail scratches her chest and breaks one of the straps of her dress.  Case over, right?  Of course not.  Elder child then testifies that mom/wife got up raising hell with father/client, before mother pushed and struck father.  In addition, child adds that mother told her to alter the story that she told the police when the police first responded to the altercation.  Case over, right?  Of course not.  Younger child testifies contradictory to mother on points that further damage mother’s credibility.  Yet, prosecutor insists on a verdict

LESSON: This case is the answer to every on-line legal question that begins is it possible to get charges dismissed.  Not really, because prosecutors are not trying to do justice, just try cases and get experience. So, retain an experienced attorney.

CASE: State of Georgia v. Mercedes Yvette Wilson (# 10B-5765-8)  

RESULTS: (November, 2012) After a three day trial, client found NOT GUILTY of felony Theft by Taking charge, relating to the failure to return a rental vehicle.  

FACTS: Mercedes procured a rental vehicle for friend of boyfriend.  She signed the rental agreement, provided her true and accurate information and failed to return the vehicle, or make sure the vehicle was returned.  The rental company eventually locates the vehicle, but refuses to lift the warrants issued against Mercedes.  The prosecutor insists on pursuing the charges because of client’s prior theft offense.  The jury deliberated about four hours, before finding client NOT GUILTY.

RESULTS: (September, 2012) After a four-day jury trial, client is found NOT GUILTY of two counts of Aggravated Battery, and GUILTY of one count of Aggravated Battery and one count of Cruelty to Children.  Client sentenced to eight years in prison to be followed by seven years on probation, which was much better than the pre-trial offer of twelve years in prison to be followed by eight years on probation.  Because the jury in its verdict announced it was unsure who caused all of the injuries on the four week old child, the judge sentenced my client to only what he was found guilty of.

FACTS: Client begins talking to a girl on-line in December, 2009.  They agree that they should take their relationship to the next level, and he moves from MA to GA.  When he arrives in GA, he finds that she is eight months pregnant with another guy’s baby.  Teenage client moves in with new girlfriend and her extended family, many of which speak only Vietnamese.  The new girlfriend gives birth about a month after client arrives, and he is charged with taking care of the child.  Two weeks after the child was born, she was taken to the hospital for gastrointestinal issues, and remains in the hospital for five days.  Two days after his release, she returns to the hospital for another three days.  Three days after her third release from the hospital, the mother returns to work at the nail salon.  On the morning of the third day that my client is caring for the child by himself, the child has a problem.  My client admits to trying to pull her arm from underneath her, and hears a few cracks.  Although my client maintained that the arm was an accident, the jury did not believe his defense of accident.  When the child was rushed to the hospital, the medical personal observed a cracked cranium, a number of broken ribs in various stages of healing, a ruptured spleen, a ruptured kidney and other bruises.  My client could not explain the injuries, and was arrested.  Fortunately, after hearing the evidence, the jury decided they could not explain who injured the child ribs and cranium   

MORALE: There are a few lessons to be learned from the case:

(1)    It does not benefit you to speak to police.  Jury found client guilty of what he acknowledged doing to the child, disbelieving client’s defense of accident;

(2)    Although match.com maintains that twenty- percent of all relationships begin on-line, the criminal justice system is inundated with the on-line relationships that have gone wrong.   In the criminal justice system, every sentence that begins with “we met on-line” ends poorly; and  

(3)    Sometimes your attorney cannot save you from yourself.   

CASE: State of Georgia v. Dasheme Trevan Slater (12B-4523-9)

FACTS: Seventeen year old client and friend/co-defendant decide to rob pizza delivery person.  Pizza man arrives and is accosted by two masked black men, who take his pizza, wings, cinnamon sticks, soda and pocket change.  When police arrive they receive info from neighbors regarding the direction of travel of the robbers.  The police locate client and friend/co-defendant at client’s apartment that he shares with family, and recover money, masks, pizza and wing boxes and guns.  At trial, co-defendant testified against client.  Yet, jury still had enough doubt not to reach a unanimous verdict.  Simultaneously, client had enough sense not to press his luck and have another jury trial.    

RESULTS: (August, 2012) After a three-day jury trial, client is found NOT GUILTY of sole count of Aggravated Assault, ending the case and her bad relationship with her husband.

FACTS: Female client cuts husband’s lower leg with a knife during a domestic altercation, where the husband is destroying her computer, offering physical violence and threatening client.  Unfaithful husband/victim, who admitted forwarding photos of his genitalia to his mistress to the jury, repeatedly accused his wife of cheating, and then attacks her.  He is cut in self-defense by a woman he anticipated was broken by his oppressive personality.  She still had a little life.