Restoration of Rights and Pardons from the State of Georgia

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

by Mary Agramonte

Mary Agramonte is an attorney with W. Scott Smith P.C.

Mary Agramonte is an attorney with W. Scott Smith P.C.

A felony conviction on your record comes with many consequences. You served the time, but now you are finding more and more ways that your record is stopping you from getting to where you want to be. For example, convicted felons lose various civil and political rights. Felons cannot vote while they are still incarcerated or on parole or probation. A convicted felon is unable to run for and hold public office or serve on a jury.

In Georgia, felons can apply to restore these civil rights that were lost at the time of their conviction. The right to vote is automatically restored upon completion of the sentence. However, if you are looking to restore your civil and political rights, a special application must be submitted asking the State of Georgia to allow you to serve on a jury and hold a public office. To be eligible to have your civil and political rights restored, you must have completed your sentence within two (2) years prior to applying, and you must demonstrate that you have been living a law-abiding life. There is no fee to apply to have your civil and political rights restored through the State Board of Pardons and Paroles.

If you are finding that your criminal history is following you, but that you are not eligible for Record Restriction, which is Georgia’s version of expungement, Georgia Record Restriction Blog there may be a way for you to advance in your employment and education, despite the felony conviction on your record. In limited circumstances, the State of Georgia can pardon your offense, which is an official forgiveness granted to you. The pardon does not expunge or erase the crime from your record. However, a pardon will serve as an Official Statement attached to your criminal record that states the State of Georgia has pardoned, or forgiven, your crime. The State will make this decision based on the fact that you have maintained a good reputation after completing your sentence, and have truly changed your life after the conviction. Pardons have a better chance of being granted if there is clear proof that the felony is disallowing your qualification for employment in your chosen field. An official pardon will also automatically restore your civil and political rights. In order to apply for a pardon, you must have completed your sentence at least five years ago, and have not gotten into trouble at all in the last five years. All restitution must be paid in full by the time you apply.  Letters of recommendation, school documents, resumes, and awards and certificates, are all helpful to show the State how important a pardon would be in your life.

There is no fee and the State uses the same application for restoring civil and political rights, and for pardons. The application can be found here: Restoration of Rights Application

Our law firm consists of seven criminal defense attorneys who represent individuals facing felony and misdemeanor charges in Georgia. We hope this information helps you restore your civil or political rights in Georgia. If you are currently facing criminal charges, our knowledgeable and experienced criminal defense lawyers have what it takes to defend against the most serious offenses. Call us today for a free consultation at 404-581-0999.

VIDEO – Marijuana Possession in Georgia May be Treated as a Felony

/in , , , , /by

Did you know that personal possession of less than one ounce of marijuana isn’t always classified as a misdemeanor under Georgia law? I’m Scott Smith and personal possession of marijuana is the subject of today’s video blog.

The statutes that cover marijuana laws are in the official code of Georgia Title Sixteen Chapter Thirteen. This chapter covers all controlled substances under the Georgia Code.

In Georgia, it is only a misdemeanor to possess less than one ounce of marijuana for personal use if that marijuana is still in plant form. That includes all areas of the plant including low potency areas like leaves, stalks, and stems.

But if that same less than one ounce of marijuana has been extracted or concentrated into a substance that no longer has a plant like appearance, then possession of any amount of that substance is considered a felony under Georgia law.

This includes marijuana infused foods like lollipops, brownies, and candies along with concentrated marijuana that takes the appearance of a wax and oil like substances.

Possession of any type of marijuana, plant or otherwise, of one ounce or more is a felony under Georgia law.

If you’re facing possession of marijuana charges, it is important to know your defenses. Was the marijuana found after an illegal traffic stop? Is there enough marijuana to be tested? Has the marijuana been tested and did it come back positive? Was the amount of marijuana found less than the officer states in their report?

At the Peach State Lawyer law firm, our experienced drug attorneys can evaluate these defenses and discuss strategy in handling your case. Georgia law provides options for handling your marijuana case that can allow experienced attorneys to prevent convictions on your criminal history, even for repeat offenders.

Call us today for a free consultation at 404-581-0999 and let us help you with your marijuana case. Thank you.

Georgia Analysis of Utah vs. Strieff Decision

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

by Ryan Walsh

The Fourth amendment of the United States Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. Traditionally, evidence found after a 4th amendment violation is excluded under what is known as the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine. That is, any evidence recovered after a fourth amendment violation occurs is suppressed by the court and cannot be used against the defendant in his case. However, in the last ten years the United States Supreme Court has limited this exclusionary “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine to situations where exclusion is the last resort by highlighting a number of exceptions. ryan-walsh

Exceptions to the exclusionary rule under federal law include when an officer acts in good faith in what he believes is a legal search, when evidence is acquired through an independent source, when evidence would inevitably been discovered without the unconstitutional source, and the attenuation doctrine. The attenuation doctrine states that evidence is admissible when the connection between the 4th amendment violation and the evidence found is distant or the connection between the 4th amendment violation has been interrupted by a change in circumstances. The recent United States Supreme Court opinion, Utah vs. Strieff directly addresses the attenuation doctrine, creating situations where intervening circumstances cause Georgia citizens to be subject to searches and seizures that would otherwise be unreasonable under the Fourth amendment of the United States Constitution. Utah vs. Strieff, 579 U.S. ___ (2016).

In Utah, Edward Strieff left a home on foot that had been tied to drug activity and walked to a gas station. Officer Fackrell, who had been surveilling the home, approached Strieff, identified himself, asked Strieff for identification, detained him, and then questioned him regarding what he was doing at the residence. Officer Fackrell gave Strieff’s information to a police dispatcher, who told Fackrell that Strieff had an outstanding arrest warrant for a traffic violation. Strieff was arrested and a search of his person was performed incident to the arrest, where Officer Fackrell found methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia on Strieff. Strieff then moved to suppress the evidence of methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia. The State of Utah conceded that Officer Fackrell did not have reasonable suspicion for the stop, but argued that because of the arrest warrant, the connection between the unlawful stop and the search had been attenuated and the search incident to arrest and seizure were valid under the Fourth Amendment.

The United States Supreme Court agreed with the State of Utah. Despite the fact that the stop of Strieff was unlawful, the Court held that the valid arrest warrant created a change in circumstances that “attenuated” the illegal stop from the valid search and seizure. In looking towards whether there was a sufficient change in circumstances between the conduct that violated the fourth amendment and the discovery of methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia on Strieff, the Court looked to three factors. The three factors are (1) “the temporal proximity between the unconstitutional conduct and the discovery of the evidence, (2) the presence of intervening circumstances, and (3) the purpose and flagrancy of the official misconduct.” Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590, 603-604 (1975). The Court found that factor one favored Strieff in that the time between the unconstitutional conduct and the discovery of evidence was very brief. But the Court found that factors two and three favored the State. The existence of a valid arrest warrant was a significant intervening circumstance, and that Officer Fackrell was at most negligent in his stopping of Strieff outside the gas station. In discussing Officer Fackrell’s negligence, the Court addresses what they call his “good-faith mistakes.” Therefore, the evidence seized by Officer Fackrell was admissible at trial against Strieff. Now that we’ve analyzed the law applied by the United States Supreme Court, is the holding in Utah v. Strieff applicable to Georgia citizens?

Georgia’s restrictions on searches and seizures are greater than the protections provided by the United States Government. Georgia codified their exclusionary rule in O.C.G.A. §17-5-30. The language in that statute provides no good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. Further, Georgia courts don’t officially recognize any specific exceptions to the exclusionary rule, but they do offer their rationale in determining whether evidence that could be excluded as “fruit of the poisonous tree” will be excluded. That rationale is most clearly articulated in Vergara v. State. Vergara v. State, 283 Ga 175 (2008). In Vergara, the Supreme Court of Georgia says, “Under the fruits doctrine as

explicated by the (United States) Supreme Court and adopted by this Court, we need not hold that all evidence is ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’ simply because it would not have come to light but for the illegal actions of the police. … The more apt question … is ‘whether… the evidence … has been come at by exploitation of that illegality or instead by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged by the primary taint.’” Vergara, at 182-183.

Applying the absence of a good-faith exception along with the guidance provided in Vergara, it’s unclear what Georgia courts would do if presented with the facts of Strieff. Edward Strieff was approached by Officer Fackrell and asked for his identification, which he provided. Fackrell ran his identification and saw the outstanding warrant, arrested, Strieff, and found the contraband. Because there is no good-faith exception to unreasonable searches and seizures under Georgia law, Officer Fackrell cannot be said to be merely negligent in his stop of Strieff. The evidence was clearly found as a direct result of the bad stop. And the evidence is of the sort that may not have been found independently or inevitably. There are strong arguments that this sort of evidence is still fruit of the poisonous tree under Georgia’s application of the Fourth Amendment.

However, until Georgia addresses this issue, it is unclear whether a valid arrest warrant can trigger a search incident to arrest for an otherwise unlawful stop. If you’ve been arrested and feel your Georgia rights have been violated, call the Peach State Lawyer today for a free consultation at 404-581-0999.

VIDEO – Your Right to Remain Silent!

/in , , , , , , /by

by  Scott Smith and Ryan Walsh

What do you do when the police begin to ask you questioning in relation to a criminal investigation? We are all familiar with those magic words we hear so often in television and film. You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney.
That’s the beginning of the Miranda warning, a warning that must be given in any situation where a government agent or police officer has placed you in custody, is questioning you, and seeks to admit those responses into evidence against you at trial. What most of us don’t realize is that warning doesn’t have to be given in every situation where you are being questioned. For the Miranda warning to apply, the Georgia government agent or police office must be questioning you while you are in custody. Custody is a legal term that doesn’t have an exact meaning. It is determined by looking at a totality of the circumstances surrounding the questioning.
Circumstances that impact whether you are deemed to be in custody to trigger a Miranda warning include:
  • Who asked the questions?
  • How many officers were present?
  • Were any non-law enforcement officials or government agents present?
  • Did the officer tell the suspect the interview was voluntary?
  • Where did the questioning take place?
  • Did the officer use any physical restraints, like handcuffs?
  • How long was the conversation?
  • Was the suspect free to leave at the end of the conversation?
These factors, along with others, are things the court looks at when determining if it was necessary for a Miranda warning to be read. Failure of the investigative official or government agent to read your Miranda rights does not necessarily mean the charges against you will be dropped. It just means your responses to those questions that violated your rights will not be admissible in court.
You don’t have to wait to hear those words that begin a Miranda warning to exercise your right not to talk to the police or any other investigative authority. Any person who is being stopped, detained, or investigated for the commission of a crime has no duty to answer any questions asked of them by any law enforcement or investigative official of Georgia or any state in the United States. And at W. Scott Smith, PC, the Peach State Lawyer, we advise all our current and potential clients to politely decline to answer any questions until after speaking with an attorney about the facts and circumstances surrounding the questioning.
We see the scenario play out in consultations every day. A Georgia officer walks up to the driver’s side of our potential client’s vehicle and asks “Do you know how fast you were going?” Or “How much have you had to drink tonight?” Our immediate instinct is to think we’re caught; let’s embellish the truth a bit. And instead of telling the officer ‘I politely refuse to answer any questions or exactly seventy-four miles per hour, Officer’, you make up a number 5-10 miles per hour over the speed limit, or respond with the ever-popular ‘two drinks.’ At this point the speeding case is over. You’ve admitted to violating at least one Georgia speeding statute. And in regards to the investigation into Driving under the Influence of Alcohol, we’ve given the officer an admission of alcohol consumption that may give them probable cause to arrest you for DUI in conjunction with any traffic infractions.
The reason we advise our clients to politely refuse to answer questions is because these officers are not on your side. They aren’t trying to find a reason not to cite you, not to arrest you, not to take warrants out against you. Their job is to gather evidence of criminal activity and to determine who most likely committed the crime. Georgia law enforcement officers are trained to ask specific, pointed, leading questions to get you to make admissions that could lead to you being charged with a crime. Those questions are designed for only one reason, and that is to gather information that can ultimately be used against you. DO NOT help them with their job. Even if you know you are one hundred percent innocent in the circumstances surrounding the Georgia law enforcement officer’s questions, politely decline their questions, tell them you want a lawyer, and let them release or arrest you.
Answering police officers questions without an attorney present will not help your case. Telling an officer you only had two drinks, or telling an officer you don’t have any marijuana on you but you smoked earlier, does not let them know that you were safe to drive or that you aren’t guilty of possession of marijuana. It tells them that you’re willing to voluntarily provide them with evidence they are going to use against you in their DUI or Drug investigation.
If you have any questions about your rights, if you’ve been contacted by law enforcement and asked to give a statement, or you’ve been arrested and questioned, you must contact us immediately. It is imperative that an experienced criminal defense attorney assess your situation, prevent further statements, and see if your rights have been violated in prior questioning. Call The Peach State Lawyer today at 404-581-0999 for a free consultation.

Drug Possession in Georgia

/in , , , , , /by

Drug Possession in Georgia
By: Mary Agramonte
Read more about the attorney here.

The legal system in Georgia treats drug crimes very seriously. If you have been arrested for the possession of drugs in the State of Georgia, you are likely facing serious prison time. Due to the severity of the charges, you need a lawyer who is skilled in the state’s drug laws and any possible defenses.

Mary Agramonte is an attorney with W. Scott Smith P.C. and represents those charged with drug possession in Georgia.

Mary Agramonte is an attorney with W. Scott Smith P.C.

Under the Georgia Controlled Substance Act, drugs are classified into 5 Schedules based on their potential for abuse, tendency for addiction, and their recognized medical uses. Schedule I is considered to have the highest risk of physical and psychological dependency and are considered to have no medical use, while Schedule V is recognized to have lower risk of dependency and legitimate medical use. The following are examples of common drugs in each schedule.

Schedule I

Heroin, THC, LSD, and MDMA (ecstasy).

Schedule II

Cocaine, Codein, Hydrocodone, Morphine, Methadone, Amphetamine, Methamphetamine, Oxycontin, Percocet

Schedule III

Suboxone, Ketamine, Anabolic steroids

Schedule IV

Xanax, Ambien, Valium

Drug Possession Penalties in Georgia

The penalties for drug possession in Georgia are harsh. It is a felony if you are arrested for drug possession in Georgia, except for marijuana if it less than an ounce. If it is your first offense and you are found guilty of a Schedule I or II drug, you are looking at 2-15 years in prison, intense probation, and high fines.

On second or subsequent offenses of Schedule I or II drugs, you are looking at at least 5 years in prison, and up to 30, with the possibility of similar probation and high fines as the first.

If you are found with Schedule III, IV, or V drugs, the penalty will be 1 to 5 years in prison. If it is your second or subsequent offense, you are facing 1 to 10 years prison time.

Additionally, if the offense date was prior to July 1, 2015 and a car was used during the felony, your driver’s license will be suspended if you are found guilty of drug possession.

How the State Proves Possession

The drugs do not have to be found on your person for you to be guilty of drug possession. Driving a car in which drugs are found is enough for the law to determine that you are in violation of the Controlled Substance Act. Even if the drugs are found thrown out or hidden, the State will still try to prove you were in possession. Depending on where the drugs were found, two people or more can be considered to have possession of the same drugs. Important facts for for your case will be whether paraphernalia or residue was found, and also whether you attempted to flee.

Talk to an Attorney

Because a conviction of drug possession carries serious prison time, it is important you speak with an attorney who is knowledgeable about drug possession laws in Georgia. Pleading guilty to any drug possession offense will have lifelong consequences that we want you to avoid. We would like for you to understand what you are facing and all of your legal options so that you can move on from this arrest in the best way possible. Call us for a FREE CONSULTATION today at 404-581-0999 and mention this blog.

 

 

Miranda Rights

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

MIRANDA RIGHTS

By Andrew Powell Esq.

Almost everyone has seen a crime television show and heard the infamous phrase “you have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law, you have the right to an attorney, and if you cannot afford one an attorney would be appointed to you.” However, most people do not know when or why this phrase is so commonly used by police. In 1966, the United States Supreme Court decided to require law enforcement officials to read this list of rights to someone who has been taken into custody. These rights are known commonly as your “Miranda Rights.”

Purpose Of Reading The Miranda Rights

The United States Constitution and specifically the Fifth Amendment guarantees anyone who has been arrested the right not to incriminate themselves. Plainly put, an individual does not have to talk to police when they have been arrested. The Constitution and our form of justice requires that the government carry their burden and prove to a judge or jury that someone charged with a crime is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.georgia-juvenile-defense

Too often law enforcement officials become overzealous with their search for the truth and overstep the Constitutional bounds in their pursuit. It may not surprise you that police use coercive tactics or even lie to someone to get them to confess to a crime. Miranda warnings are a safeguard to protect against those who may cross that Constitutional boundary. The government must show the court that you were read your Miranda rights and that you waived your rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

When Does Miranda Apply To Me?

Confessions are the leading source of Miranda violations. When someone has been accused of a crime, big or small, they are often questioned in connection with that crime. Miranda rights must be read to someone after they are under arrest and before any law enforcement official asks any questions to the suspect.  Law enforcement officials have a tough job and they investigate crimes every day. Many officers are trying to make quick decisions based on little information. However, this does not allow them to just simply force people to talk to them and answer their questions.

Many times law enforcement officials will arrest someone and take them back to the police station for an interview. Generally, they will quickly go over your rights with you and ask you if you want to talk to them. If you have been charged with a crime this is where you want to stop and tell the law enforcement official that you would like to speak to your attorney.

When Does Miranda Not Apply To Me?

People sometimes think that any encounter with law enforcement requires them to read you your Miranda rights. This is untrue. Most encounters between people and law enforcement do not require the reading of your Miranda rights. As discussed above, the Miranda warnings are only required when you have been placed under arrest and the police are asking you questions regarding the crime.

Traffic stops are a common place to have an encounter with law enforcement where Miranda warnings are not required to be read to someone. In this circumstance, generally you are not under arrest and law enforcement is just going to ask you some general questions and write you a ticket.

In terms of a DUI, the police officer is not required to read the Miranda warnings. The officer may ask you to take a series of tests, known as Field Sobriety Tests or request you to blow into a machine that registers your blood alcohol content. Even though the officer does not have to read your Miranda rights to you, you have the ability to refuse these tests and refuse giving a breath sample.

Another common scenario is when law enforcement asks you to come to the station and make a statement. In this circumstance, Miranda warnings are not necessary because you have voluntarily come to the police station and are not under arrest. Remember, law enforcement is only required to give you the Miranda warnings once you have been arrested and before they initiate any questioning of you.

What Does A Miranda Violation Mean For Me?

Confessions or statements made to law enforcement will not be allowed at trial if law enforcement has not, first, read you the warnings required in Miranda. If you were forced into making a statement or the police did not read your rights to you and you then confess to a crime, whether it is a DUI or murder, that confession cannot be used against you at your trial. With your statement or confession tossed out it can help strengthen your case and possibly force the prosecutor’s office to drop the charges because they do not have enough evidence to prosecute you.

If you have been charged with crime and feel your rights were violated during the process, call our office and we can help you navigate the system. Our office has extensive experience in misdemeanors and felonies. Fighting charges with an attorney’s help is important because any conviction on your record will greatly reduce the possibility of having future charges lowered or dismissed. At the W. Scott Smith law firm we can identify where the police have violated your rights and ensure evidence will be kept out. Our firm can handle your misdemeanor or felony case with the expertise you need to save your record. Give us a call for a free consultation at 404-581-0999.

What Is Arraignment?

/in , , , , , , , , /by

WHAT IS ARRAIGNMENT?

“What is arraignment?”

That’s the first question every client asks us when they receive their first court date, and it’s a great one.   Most of our clients have either received a court date prior to meeting with us or they were told when they leave the jail that they will receive an arraignment date in the near future.  So, what is arraignment?

In Georgia, every person is entitled to due process of law under the Georgia Constitution and the United States Constitution.  A citizen’s due process rights include the right to be placed on notice of any charges the State intends to seek.   The State files charges through either a formal indictment or accusation. These documents are ultimately the framework of how the case will proceed.  As such, arraignment is the first opportunity for the court to inform the accused of the charges against them.  Under Georgia law, every person accused of a crime has the right to be arraigned.  Formal arraignment is when the court reads the charges in open court and an accused has an opportunity to enter a plea of either guilty or not guilty. courtroomdoorfrombench1 (1)

So what actually happens in court at the arraignment hearing?  From a practical stand-point three things happen at arraignment.   First, one of our lawyers will likely inform the court that we are waiving formal arraignment (reading of the charges in open court) because we have received the actual charging document and we would prefer, for the sake of privacy, for our clients charges not to be read in front of hundreds of people.  Second, we enter a plea of not guilty.  At this juncture the State has not provided the evidence they intend to use at trial and we would essentially be accepting guilt without evaluating the case.  Thus, it makes sense to plead not guilty, collect evidence, and then proceed accordingly.  Finally, we inform the court that we will be filing legal motions and ask the court for ten-days to file.  Legal motions cover many issues including asking the Judge to force the State to provide evidence, suppress evidence, hold a hearing on legal issues, and many other topics.

If you have been charged with a crime then your case will eventually be set for an arraignment hearing.  Please contact our office today at 404-581-0999 for a free consultation at either our downtown location or our Marietta location to discuss arraignment and how we can help with your case.

Labor Day: Traffic Stop Tips

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

LABOR DAY WEEKEND EDITION: What Do You Need To Know During A Police Traffic Stop?

trafficstoppic

Most people share a general sense of anxiety when they see blue lights flashing in their rear-view mirror.  If you’re like me, when the blue lights come on your heart starts beating 100 mph, you start sweating, and your mind is racing.   Here are some helpful pointers on how to interact with a police officer during a traffic stop.

WHEN YOU SEE THE “BLUE LIGHTS”

1)   Slow down and pull over as quickly as possible.  You never want to give the officer the impression that you’re attempting to get away.  Also, you don’t want to slam on the brakes immediately.  Find a safe location (parking lot, driveway, open area on the side of the road, etc..) and pull over.

2)  Roll down your window, turn off your car, place the keys on the dashboard, and have your driver’s license ready to hand to the Officer.   Obviously, if a police officer pulls you over he/she is going to want to speak with you.  It’s always a good idea to go ahead and roll your window down as soon as possible.  You wouldn’t want the officer to think that you’re having difficulty with the simple task of rolling your window down.  So go ahead and do that first.

Placing your keys on the dashboard will put the officer at ease that you’re not going to take off.  A calm Officer can sometimes be the difference in going to jail and going home.

In addition, the Officers are trained to see if you have difficulty locating your driver’s license.  To many officers, the fact that you are nervous and may not be able to find your license right away is not normal and instead is an indication you’re drunk.  So go ahead and eliminate that assumption immediately.

3)   Let the Officer speak first.   The Officer is trained to get you to admit to the crime he/she thinks you’ve committed.  So a common question an Officer will ask is: “do you know why I pulled you over?”   A lot of people will say: “Yes, I was (insert traffic offense).”   If the Officer is recording your conversation, then there is a strong possibility that statement will be used against in court.  So go ahead and answer the question with an affirmative “no.”   It’s the Officers burden to prove you guilty of the alleged offense and not your burden to proof yourself innocent.

4)  BE POLITE!  This is the key to any interaction with a police officer.  If you are a jerk to the Officer the chances of you getting a ticket and/or getting arrested go up significantly.   Sometimes a police officer can say things that are rude or inconsiderate.   Take the high road.   Remember, on the road he feels like he is in charge and has the ability to really mess up your day.  You’ll have the final say if the case goes to court.  So don’t make it easier for the Officer.  Just be polite and your behavior won’t be used against you at a later date.

If you end up with blue lights in your rear view mirror, try some of the tips listed above.       We hope that no one ends up getting ticketed or, even worse, arrested.

Labor Day weekend is a great chance to relax and enjoy time with friends and family.  With so many people on the road, you can almost guarantee that the police will be out in force.  So be careful and have a great weekend.

GEORGIA LEGISLATURE CHANGES MUGSHOT LAWS

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A few months ago  we talked about the legality of having your mugshot posted all over the internet (see: Georgia Mugshot Websites). Recently, the Georgia General Assembly took another hard stance against companies who prey on those who are booked through Georgia jails.  Our legislature made some drastic changes to the Georgia mugshot laws.

Georgia law now requires that law enforcement agencies refrain from posting booking photographs on their jail inmate website.  The General Assembly went on to limit access to any booking photographs by restricting access to those who are (1) not using the photo for purposes for written publication or website publication; and (2) the person trying to obtain the photograph is not asking for removal or deletion of the booking photograph in exchange for money.  Law Enforcement agencies now can only release photographs to individuals who sign a statement affirming that the use of the photograph will NOT be for purposes of mugshot websites.

The General Assembly obviously recognized there was a serious problem with websites extorting those who have been booked through the criminal process.  Already, the Cobb County Sheriff’s Department has taken steps to remove all photographs from their jail website in accordance with the new law. Hopefully, these steps will put an end to for profit mugshot websites.

Please contact our office today at 404-581-0999 if you have been arrested in Georgia and you need help getting your mugshot removed.

Police Roadblocks in Georgia

/in , , , , , , , /by

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT ROADBLOCKS IN GEORGIA

by W. Scott Smith Esq. 

Roadblocks have become more and more popular among Georgia law enforcement agencies.  In North Georgia, we are seeing Georgia State Patrol roadblocks and Georgia Public Safety roadblocks for DUI more than ever before.

Here is what you need to know: The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution imposes limits on search-and-seizure powers in order to prevent arbitrary and oppressive interference by Georgia police officials with the privacy and personal security of individuals. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees “[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” U.S. Const. amend. IV. As its text indicates, the ultimate touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is ‘reasonableness.’ When a driver brings his vehicle to a stop as a result of a request or show of authority by a law enforcement officer, the officer effectively seizes the vehicle and everyone in the vehicle, the driver and all passengers. Such a seizure ordinarily is unreasonable, and hence unconstitutional – absent individualized suspicion. The United States Supreme Court has recognized, however, a narrow exception to the individualized suspicion requirement for vehicle stops made pursuant to a plan embodying explicit, neutral limitations on the conduct of individual officers. Under this checkpoint exception, the reasonableness of the initial stop depends not on individualized suspicion that the driver has committed a traffic violation or other wrongdoing, but instead on the balance between the public interest served by the checkpoint program and the right of individuals to personal security free from arbitrary and oppressive interference by Georgia officials.

Aside from general reasonableness, the Fourth Amendment applied to roadblocks also requires that the government follow with two other main requirements:

The first is that a roadblock is only satisfactory where [1] the decision to implement the roadblock was made by supervisory personnel rather than the officers in the field; [2] all vehicles are stopped as opposed to random vehicle stops; [3] the delay to motorists is minimal; [4] the roadblock operation is well identified as a police checkpoint; and [5] the screening officer’s training and experience is sufficient to qualify him to make an initial determination as to which motorists should be given field tests for intoxication.

The second requirement is that a roadblock program must a have a principle purpose other than the general interest in crime control. The Georgia Supreme Court stated late last year in its landmark roadblock decision Brown v. State that this requirement poses the question as to why an agency utilizes a roadblock.  If the primary purpose of the checkpoint program is crime-fighting in general then the checkpoints implemented under that program are unconstitutional, even if the decision to implement them was made well in advance by the official with the most policymaking authority in the agency.  The Court stated it is at the “programmatic level” that the “primary purpose” inquiry must focus, with the goal of ensuring that the agency has not authorized roadblocks primarily for the general crime control but rather for an “appropriate limited purpose” like traffic safety. Thus, the question is whether the police checkpoint at issue implement pursuant to a checkpoint program that had when viewed at the programmatic level, an appropriate primary purpose other than general crime control.

Based on this recent case law, when we challenge your initial stop at a roadblock by way of a motion to suppress, the State bears the burden of proving that the seizure was constitutional. This requires the State to prove that the stop was reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. At a minimum, the State must show that the law enforcement agency’s checkpoint program had an appropriate primary purpose other than ordinary crime control-a purpose examined at the programmatic level, rather than by trying to determine the motives of the supervisor who implemented and the officers who coordinated the particular roadblock at issue. Further, the State bears the burden of proving that the five (5) requirements in step one were met.  The written policy in Brown stated that the primary purpose of a roadblock was namely “to monitor and check driver’s licenses, driver condition, vehicle registrations, vehicle equipment, and various other requirements of the Georgia State Motor Vehicle and Traffic Code.” Further, the policy also expressly forbids the use of roadblocks as a pretext for general crime detection.  The Court upheld the policy as satisfying the second requirement.

It is our opinion at our criminal defense law firm that every roadblock needs to be closely scrutinized for illegal seizure.  Proper scrutiny requires an examination of a policy purpose of the checkpoint at the programmatic level. The Georgia law enforcement policy must sufficiently limit the agency performing the roadblock, whether it be Georgia State Patrol or others, so that the primary purpose of a roadblock could not be for general crime detection.