State v. L.W. - Burglary
L.W. was stopped by an officer for looking nervous and suspicious. During the stop, the police were told to be on the look out for a burglary suspect fitting L.W.'s description. When the police questioned L.W. about the burglaries, she confessed to multiple burglaries. She also showed detectives property reportedly taken in the burglaries an hour before.
Mr. Lynch filed a motion to suppress the evidence, which led to L.W.'s case being dismissed. At the motion, Mr. Lynch argued L.W. had been stopped illegally. The judge agreed that the Officer violated L.W.'s rights by stopping her. Every piece of evidence was thrown out of court. With no evidence, the State was left with no choice but to dismiss L.W.'s case.
State v. L.M. - DUI
L.M. was stopped at three A.M. for speeding on I-85. A specially trained DUI Task Force Officer conducted the stop. The Officer approached L.M.'s car. The Officer asked if L.M. had used drugs or alcohol that night. L. M. confessed to having smoked marijuana.
L.M. failed all the Officer's field sobriety tests and was arrested for DUI. Once L.M. was booked into the county jail, he took the State's chemical test and failed.
L.M. drives for a living. If he had been convicted of DUI, he would have lost his job.
Mr. Lynch took L.M.'s case to trial. Mr. Lynch attacked the Officer's credibility and the value of the roadside field sobriety tests. After the Officer testified, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation crime lab analyst took the stand. Under cross-examination, she admitted the State's chemical test only showed L.M. had used drugs and not that he was under the influence at the time of his arrest.
The jury found L.M. not guilty of DUI. L.M. still drives for a living today.
State v. A.M. - Armed Robbery, False Imprisonment, Kidnapping, Aggravated Assault, Sexual Battery
A.M. was accused of Armed Robbery, False Imprisonment, Kidnapping, and Aggravated Assault against two separate women at two separate times. A.M. maintained his innocence. The State had multiple witnesses, DNA, and a lot of physical evidence supporting their case. A.M. was facing the possibility of life in prison.
As part of the defense, a thorough pretrial investigation was conducted. The investigation revealed that the State's star witness had been arrested for prostitution since making the accusations against A.M.
Armed with this information, Mr. Lynch approached the prosecutor and negotiated a plea to a misdemeanor and no prison or jail time for A.M.
State v. D.B. - Pimping
D.B. chose the wrong moment to speak to an attractive woman at the gas station. This woman was an undercover vice cop. D.B. was arrested and thrown in the jail, charged with pimping. D.B. had done nothing more than have a five-minute conversation, but that conversation could have cost him years in jail.
Mr. Lynch took D.B.'s case to trial. After the State presented their evidence, Mr. Lynch convinced the judge to throw the case out of court. The judge directed a not guilty verdict on all counts because he agreed with Mr. Lynch's argument that, based on the evidence presented at trial, no one could find D.B. guilty of pimping.
State v. G.W. - DUI (Accident Case)
G.W. came home from work and had a beer with his dinner. Later he went to the store. On the way home, he wrecked into another car. G.W. was injured and confused when the police arrived. After taking a few statements and smelling beer on G.W.'s breath, the officer assumed G.W. was DUI and arrested him. At the county jail, G.W. consented to every type of chemical test the state requested.
G.W. had lived the first fifty years of his life without a conviction and could not have one now. G.W. drove for a living and would lose his job if convicted. Mr. Lynch prepared the case for trial. On the morning of trial, the State approached Mr. Lynch and offered to reduce G.W.'s charges to reckless driving. G.W. took the deal.
G.W. still has his license and his job.
State v. V.M. - Family Violence Battery, Battery, Disorderly Conduct
V.M. crossed paths with an ex-girlfriend. Their relationship had ended on bad terms. An argument ensued and the police were called. When the police arrived, they believed her version of events. In a desperate attempt to stay out of jail, V.M. made an incriminating statement. V.M. was arrested and charged with several violent crimes.
V.M was not willing to accept anything less than the case being dismissed. Mr. Lynch prepared V.M.'s case for trial.
Mr. Lynch had a pretrial motion and argued that V.M.'s statement was made in violation of his Miranda rights. The motion succeeded and V.M.'s incriminating statement was kept out of his trial.
During the trial, Mr. Lynch exposed V.M.'s ex-girlfriend's story for what it was, unbelievable. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty in under twenty minutes.
State v. D.B. - Felony Theft
D.B. was a terrible businessman. He was so terrible that the State accused him of committing felony theft. Many things had happened to bring D.B. to the position he was in, but D.B. never intended to steal anything. D.B. was a terrible businessman but he never had the intent to commit a theft.
Mr. Lynch prepared D.B.'s case for trial. During the closing argument, Mr. Lynch told the jury that D.B. did everything the State accused him of, but he never intended to steal. D.B. was just a bad businessman. The jury agreed and found D.B. not guilty of felony theft.
State v. S.N. - DUI (Breath Test Over .08)
S.N. was driving to pick up her boyfriend. S.N. did not know that her boyfriend had gotten in trouble with the police. The police pulled S.N. over to question her about her boyfriend's story. S.N. was doing nothing wrong. The Officer thought he smelled alcohol and pursued a DUI investigation against S.N. After being arrested, S.N. took a breathalyzer at the jail and blew well over the legal limit.
Mr. Lynch pursued a pretrial investigation of the arresting Officer. In response to Mr. Lynch’s subpoenas, the Georgia Peace Officer and Training Council turned over a troubling employment history of the arresting Officer. The Officer had a checkered past and had been fired from many other law enforcement agencies. Mr. Lynch obtained the records from the other police agencies. These records contained countless episodes of police misconduct. When the prosecutor saw her star witness' past, she dismissed the case.
State v. C.J. - Marijuana
C.J. and was drinking with a few other people outside a friend's apartment late at night. The police approached C.J. and his friends. As the police approached, they claimed to see C.J. throw something behind a wall. After handcuffing C.J. and searching him, the police looked behind the wall. There they found a green leafy substance and arrested C.J. for possession of marijuana.
In preparing C.J.'s case for trial, Mr. Lynch discovered the State had not provided C.J. with any scientific test proving the green leafy substance was in fact marijuana. The day of trial, Mr. Lynch alleged the State had violated C.J's right to scientific evidence and that the State could not prove the alleged substance was marijuana. The State dismissed C.J.'s case the day of trial.
State v. C.M. - DUI (Breath Test over .08)
After a night out, C.M. was stopped for speeding and detained while officers responded to investigate C.M. for DUI. C.M. worked as a fire fighter and could not be convicted of a DUI.
Mr. Lynch did not believe the Officers had enough evidence to arrest C.M. for DUI or ask C.M. for the incriminating breath test. In a pretrial motion to suppress, very serious allegations came out about C.M. allegedly pointing a pistol at the stopping Officer that night. The judge found it was close, but the officer had enough evidence to arrest C.M. for DUI.
Knowing that C.M. had to have his charge reduced or face losing his job, Mr. Lynch approached the judge and the prosecutor with an offer that would satisfy everyone. C.M.’s charge was reduced to reckless driving and his career as a fire fighter was saved.
Remember if you have been charged with a crime,
call Andrew R. Lynch today at (404) 373-7735.
