Archive for category: Blog

Interacting with police officers can be a stressful and unsettling experience. Many individuals, both in Coweta County and across the country, often feel confused when questioned by police. This uncertainty arises from a lack of knowledge about your personal rights during encounters with law enforcement.

Citizens are protected by the Fourth Amendment against unlawful searches and seizures. This blog explains your rights if stopped by police in your vehicle or if an officer attempts to search your body, car, or home without a warrant.

Your Freedom to Refuse a Search Without a Warrant

When a police officer attempts to search you or your property, the first question you should ask is: “Do you have a warrant?” In most cases, police officers are required to have a valid search warrant to conduct a search of your person or property. Without this, any search or seizure could be deemed unlawful, and any items found could potentially be suppressed in court through a motion to suppress filed by the defense.

When Can Police Search You Without a Warrant?

Here are a few circumstances when police officers can conduct a search without a warrant:

Search Incident to Arrest

The most common scenario where a search can occur without a warrant is when a person is arrested. This is known as a search incident to arrest. When an individual is arrested, the officer is allowed to search the person to remove any weapons or contraband that may be used to resist arrest or escape. This applies even if a significant amount of time has passed since the arrest or processing, as highlighted in in Barrera-Palamin v. State, 250 Ga. App. 580 (2001).

However, a search cannot happen before an arrest and be used as justification for the arrest itself, as seen in Smith v. Ohio, 494 U.S. 541 (1990).

Vehicle Searches

Under both the Georgia Constitution and the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, police may search a vehicle without a warrant if the driver has been arrested. This is based on the idea that law enforcement has a legitimate need to secure any weapons or evidence that may be in the vehicle. However, if the officer only issues a citation without making an arrest, they cannot search the vehicle. This is made clear in Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113 (1998).

Abandonment of Property

If you relinquish control or ownership of an item, such as a vehicle, police can search it because you no longer have an expectation of privacy. In Gresham v. State, 204 Ga. App. 540  (1992), it was ruled that if you abandon your property, you lose the right to object to a search.

Denial of Ownership

If you deny ownership of an item, such as when you refuse responsibility for an item in your possession, you lose the expectation of privacy over it. Police may search the item without violating your rights. This was affirmed in Deych v. State, 188 Ga. App. 901 (1988).

Plain View Doctrine

If police are lawfully present in an area and see evidence of a crime in plain view, they can seize it without a warrant.

Exigent Circumstances

In urgent situations, such as when there’s a risk of evidence being destroyed or a suspect fleeing, police can conduct a search without a warrant.

Stop and Frisk

If a police officer has reasonable suspicion that a person is armed and dangerous, they can stop and frisk the individual for weapons.

Border and Airport Searches

Searches that take place at the airport or at the borders may not require a warrant

Consent

If you give an officer permission to search your property, they will. They do not need a warrant after you give them permission to search your property.

Special Considerations for Cell Phones

If you are arrested and have a cell phone in your possession, it’s important to know that police cannot search the contents of your phone without a warrant. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014) ruled that police must obtain a warrant before accessing the contents of a cell phone, as it contains personal and private information.

Consequences of a Conviction

It is important to understand the potential consequences of being convicted of a crime. Your rights during a police stop or search are crucial to ensuring that your case is handled fairly. If you believe your rights have been violated during a police interaction, it’s important to seek legal advice immediately and contact us.

Remember, if you ever feel unsure about your rights or how to handle a situation with law enforcement, don’t hesitate to reach out for assistance. We are here to help you navigate these challenging moments 24/7.

 

In many cases, the lapse of time on a criminal is a helpful tool for defense attorneys. Throughout the time it takes from the initial arrest to the case’s disposition, things can happen such as a witness moving out of state and being unable to testify, etc. However, if the particular right to a speedy trial has been violated, there is recourse.

A Constitutional Speedy Motion for Trial in Georgia refers to a motion filed by a defendant in a criminal case requesting that the court ensure they receive a trial within a reasonable time, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and by the Georgia State Constitution.

1. Constitutional Right to a Speedy Trial:
   • Under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, anyone charged with a crime has the right to a speedy and public trial.
   • The Georgia State Constitution also provides a similar right to a speedy trial.
2. Purpose of the Motion:
   • A motion for a speedy trial is filed by the defense when they believe that the trial has been unduly delayed, or the prosecution has not moved forward with their case in a timely manner.
   • The defense requests that the court take action to ensure the trial happens promptly, adhering to both state and federal constitutional protections.
3. Factors Considered:
   • The court will consider several factors to determine whether the right to a speedy trial has been violated, such as:
     • The length of the delay.
     • The reason for the delay (whether it’s due to the prosecution or defense).
     • Whether the defendant has timely asserted their right to a speedy trial.
     • Whether the defendant was prejudiced by the delay (e.g., due to lost evidence, witness unavailability, etc.).
4. Consequences of Violation:
   • If the court finds that the defendant’s right to a speedy trial has been violated, they may dismiss the case in its entirety.

In short, a Constitutional Speedy Motion for Trial in Georgia is a formal request by the defense to ensure their right to a trial within a reasonable time, protecting them from undue delay in the legal process.

The Karen Read murder case has captivated the nation, not only for its shocking allegations but also for its tangled web of investigative flaws, alleged conspiracies, and the broader implications for the criminal justice system. At our criminal defense firm, we aim to shed light on cases like Karen Read’s, which exemplify the critical role of defense attorneys in safeguarding justice and exposing investigative misconduct.

Overview of the Case

Karen Read, a 44-year-old former adjunct professor and equity analyst, stands accused of the murder of her boyfriend, Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe. O’Keefe’s body was found outside a colleague’s home on January 29, 2022, in a snowbank, with his death attributed to blunt force trauma and hypothermia.

Prosecutors allege that Read drunkenly backed her Lexus SUV into O’Keefe after an evening of drinking and left him to die in the snowstorm. Read faces charges of second-degree murder, vehicular manslaughter, and leaving the scene of a collision causing death. If convicted, she could receive a life sentence.

However, Read has maintained her innocence and alleges she is being framed. Her defense team has built a case that highlights investigative flaws, inappropriate conduct by law enforcement, and potential conspiracy among police officers who were present at the scene.

A Case Marked by Investigative Misconduct

The lead investigator in the case, Trooper Michael Proctor, has become a focal point of controversy. Proctor was fired from the Massachusetts State Police in March 2025 after a trial board found him guilty of misconduct, including sending vulgar texts about Read, sharing confidential case details with non-law enforcement personnel, and drinking while on duty police say.

Proctor’s unprofessional behavior included referring to Read as a “whack job” and expressing hopes that she would take her own life in text messages to his sister. These comments, combined with his undisclosed personal ties to witnesses tied to the case, raised significant concerns about his ability to conduct an impartial investigation.

Text messages showed the unprofessional mindet of the investigting officer

The text messages were a rare glimpse into the unprofessional nature of the investigating officer.

Massachusetts State Police Trooper Michael Proctor confirmed he called Karen Read a “wack job c**t” and “retarded” and made light of her Crohn’s disease in texts sent to friends, family, and colleagues during his investigation into Boston Police Officer John O’Keefe’s death.

She waffled him. I looked at his body at the hospital. He was banged up.

“She hot, at least?” one of Proctor’s friends asked at some point.

He said he replied, “She’s a wack job c***. Yes, she’s a babe. Weird Fall River accent, though. No ass.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In other texts, he said he called Read a “nutbag” and wrote, “she’s got a leaky balloon knot. Leaks poo,” in reference to Read’s chronic illness. Read was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease at age 25 and at one point used a colostomy bag

Defense Strategies in the Karen Read Case

Karen Read’s defense team has employed a multifaceted approach to dismantle the prosecution’s case.  But one of the main points they will be able to score is the Investigator was not neutral.  From the beginning he was biased against the woman who he said has no ass.

1. Highlighting Investigative Bias: Proctor’s misconduct has been central to the defense’s narrative, with allegations that he manipulated evidence and failed to pursue other suspects due to his connections with the Albert family, whose home hosted the party.
2. Exposing Tunnel Vision: Experts have pointed to “confirmation bias” among investigators, arguing that they prematurely developed a theory of Read’s guilt and ignored contradictory evidence.

Implications for the Justice System

The Karen Read case underscores the broader issues of investigative misconduct and systemic flaws in the criminal justice system. As one legal expert stated, “If there are missteps and sloppiness in a murder investigation involving the death of a police officer, what does that suggest about the process in a more run-of-the-mill case with a civilian victim?” (NBC News Article: Karen Read murder trial: Messy investigation exposes problems with police work that public rarely sees, experts say).

Cases like Karen Read’s remind us that defense attorneys play a crucial role in holding law enforcement accountable, ensuring fairness, and advocating for those who may be wrongly accused.

What This Means for You

Karen Read’s case exemplifies the principle that every case, regardless of the circumstances, is winnable with a strong defense. The defense’s focus on the flawed investigation, highlighting undisclosed conflicts of interest, offensive text messages from the lead investigator, and the failure to consider alternative suspects, ultimately led to a hung jury in the first trial. This raises questions about the transparency of police work and the potential for evidence to be hidden or manipulated.  As the Read case demonstrates, securing all available evidence is crucial for a jury to make a fully informed decision. The subsequent firing of the lead investigator, Michael Proctor, due to his unprofessional conduct and undisclosed relationships with witnesses further underscores the importance of thorough investigation and scrutiny of police procedure. This case serves as a reminder that a vigorous defense can expose hidden truths and challenge seemingly insurmountable obstacles.

At our firm, we believe that everyone deserves a fair trial, regardless of the allegations against them. The Karen Read case illustrates the importance of thorough investigations, the need for unbiased law enforcement, and the necessity of experienced defense attorneys who will fight for justice.

If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges, don’t hesitate to reach out to us. We are here to navigate the complexities of the legal system and advocate for your rights. Justice is not just a goal—it’s our mission.

Contact Us Today

Let us help you build a strong defense, expose investigative flaws, and ensure that your voice is heard. Call us for a consultation or visit our website to learn more about our services.  Our office can be reached 24/7 at 404-581-0999.

When a prospective client calls our office, they are usually understandably overwhelmed by the judicial system. The judicial system is complicated, and it is often taken for granted that many individuals do not have any experience navigating the complex system. In this article, I will break down each step in the process when you are facing criminal charges in Fulton State Court.

Incident/Arrest

A criminal case begins when an incident occurs or when you are arrested. Sometimes this is immediately after allegedly committing a crime and sometime this is after a law enforcement agency does some investigating and decides that an arrest is appropriate and obtains a warrant from a magistrate judge. At this point, you will be booked into the Fulton County Jail.

First Appearance and Bond Hearing

This is the first time you will go before a judge. In Fulton County, felony first appearance hearings occur every day but Sunday and are held virtually at 11:30. Defendants appear from the jail and the magistrate judge and private lawyers appear remotely. When determining if you will receive a bond, and how much that bond will be, the judge will consider several things. Among other factors, the judge will consider your criminal history and your ties to the community when determining the amount of your bond.

Preliminary Hearing

In Fulton County, you will not receive a preliminary hearing if you bond out. If you do not bond out, you are entitled to this hearing in which the judge decides if there is enough evidence to support the charges. If the judge decides there is not enough evidence to support the charges, your charges will be dismissed. Remember that you won’t have this hearing if you bond out.

Transfer of Incident Report and Evidence and Investigation

Next, the arresting agency sends the incident report and any evidence to the office that will be responsible for prosecuting your case. For felonies in Fulton County, this is the District Attorney’s Office. The District Attorney’s Office will then investigate your case and prepare the paperwork needed to formally accuse your case.

Charging of Your Case

For felonies, the charging document is called an accusation or indictment. The charging document details what crimes you have been charged with and provides details about how each crime was allegedly committed. Once this charging document is drafted, your case will be assigned to a Fulton County Superior Court judge and will be assigned a unique case number that will track the case.

Arraignment

In Fulton County Superior Court, an arraignment is your first court appearance after your case is officially accused. Three things happen at arraignment: you receive a copy of the charges, you enter a plea of not guilty, and you request a jury trial. We can often waive this hearing and enter a plea of not guilty on your behalf so that you will not have to attend this court date.

Filing Motions

After your arraignment, we will file written motions in your case. We will file preliminary motions which include asking the State for a copy of the evidence in your case. After reviewing the evidence, we will file any additional necessary motions. These might include motions to suppress any evidence that we believe was obtained in a way that violated your constitutional rights.

Motions Date

After filing our written motions, your case will be placed on a motions calendar to allow us to argue the motion in front of your assigned judge. Sometimes a judge will issue a ruling right away and sometimes a judge will issue a written ruling in a few weeks. This motions hearing may include testimony from the officer that arrested you or may simply be legal argument.

Trial

If we do not receive an offer to resolve your case that is favorable, we will place your case on a trial calendar. This is our signal to the State that we want to take your case to trial in front of a jury of twelve of your peers. Depending on your charges and the amount of evidence involved in your case, trial could be as short as one day or could last multiple days.

This is an overwhelming process and is not designed to be navigated easily on your own. We would be honored to represent you through every step of the process. If you are facing any type of felony charge in the Superior  Court of Fulton County, call our office today at 404-581-0999 for a free consultation.

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the right to assemble peacefully, a fundamental freedom that allows individuals to associate with whomever they choose. However, in Georgia, the broad application of the Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act (O.C.G.A. § 16-15-4) has raised serious concerns about the criminalization of lawful association when the government alleges gang-related activity. This intersection of constitutional rights and aggressive prosecution tactics often puts individuals at risk of severe penalties simply for being in the wrong place with the wrong people.

The First Amendment ensures that individuals can gather for any reason—political, social, or personal—without fear of government interference. This includes the right to associate with family, friends, or even people with criminal records. However, in recent years, prosecutors have increasingly used Georgia’s Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act to allege that any gathering of individuals suspected of having gang ties constitutes a criminal enterprise, stripping away the fundamental protections of the First Amendment.

Under O.C.G.A. § 16-15-4, a person can be criminally prosecuted for:

• Participating in criminal gang activity by engaging in or conspiring to commit crimes with alleged gang members.
• Recruits, solicits, or coerces others into gang participation, even without direct evidence of coercion.
• Aiding or abetting criminal gang activity, even if they did not directly commit the underlying crime.
• Using property or resources to further gang activity, including places of business, homes, or vehicles.

The vague and broad language of the statute allows law enforcement to target individuals based on mere association rather than actual criminal conduct. Someone can be swept into a gang prosecution simply because they were present at a location where a crime allegedly occurred or because they were seen associating with others who are suspected of gang activity.

One of the most troubling aspects of Georgia’s Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act is how it allows the government to override constitutional protections by criminalizing relationships rather than actions. It creates an environment where a person’s mere presence at a social gathering, wearing certain clothing, or being in a particular neighborhood can be used as evidence of criminal conduct.

To make things worse, Georgia’s Evidence Code includes provisions that significantly expand the admissibility of otherwise inadmissible evidence in cases involving violations of Georgia’s Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act. Under O.C.G.A. § 24-4-418, prosecutors can introduce evidence of a defendant’s prior criminal acts, associations, or activities alleging they are related to gang membership, even if those acts are unrelated to the current charges. This evidentiary rule creates a broad avenue for the state to establish an alleged pattern of gang-related conduct, often making it harder for defendants to receive a fair trial based solely on the charge of violating Georgia’s Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act.

Furthermore, Georgia’s Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act is often applied disproportionately, targeting young individuals in marginalized communities. People who have never committed a crime can find themselves facing enhanced charges simply due to alleged gang affiliation, often based on minimal or circumstantial evidence.

The First Amendment guarantees the right to assemble freely, but laws like Georgia’s Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act threaten to erode those protections by criminalizing relationships and association. Prosecutors may attempt to stretch the law to punish people for their mere presence, rather than for actual wrongdoing. If charged under this statute, it is essential to challenge the prosecution’s overreach and fight for the fundamental rights that protect all individuals from government overreach.

If you or a loved one are facing charges under Georgia’s Street Gang Terrorism and Prevention Act, it is critical to have an experienced criminal defense attorney who understands both your constitutional rights and the flaws in the state’s case. The government must prove actual criminal intent and participation in illegal activity, not just association with certain individuals.