Schley County, GA DUI-DWI Lawyers

Sponsored Law Firm

x
Click For More Info:
Lawyer Thomas Ford
State & Federal Law
The Ford Law Firm

Assault, DUI, Firearms, Murder, more...
Expect Results, Not Excuses

I understand how the system works. Potentially, even getting the case dismissed before it is ever filed against youâ€¦it is important to act quickly. Call now at the number below.

800-298-1630
1. Thomas Ford Alpharetta, GA
  Attorney At Law - GA, 1996
  University of Florida, J.D. - 1995
2. State & Federal Law
  Criminal cases are filed in both State and Federal Courts. Click for Info.
1. Contact
2. Email
3. Refer
4. Blog
5. Visit:
6. Website
7. Profile

Not enough matches for Schley DUI-DWI lawyer.
Below are all Schley lawyers.

Patrick D. Gill

General Practice

Status: Inactive Licensed: 39 Years

CONTACT

3049 Lacrosse Road, Ellaville, GA 31806

Troy G. Morrow

General Practice

Status: Inactive Licensed: 113 Years

CONTACT

Ellaville, GA 31806

800-923-0641

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

LEGAL TERMS

GRAND JURY

In criminal cases, a group that decides whether there is enough evidence to justify an indictment (formal charges) and a trial. A grand jury indictment is the f... (more...)

In criminal cases, a group that decides whether there is enough evidence to justify an indictment (formal charges) and a trial. A grand jury indictment is the first step, after arrest, in any formal prosecution of a felony.

SEARCH WARRANT

An order signed by a judge that directs owners of private property to allow the police to enter and search for items named in the warrant. The judge won't issue... (more...)

An order signed by a judge that directs owners of private property to allow the police to enter and search for items named in the warrant. The judge won't issue the warrant unless she has been convinced that there is probable cause for the search -- that reliable evidence shows that it's more likely than not that a crime has occurred and that the items sought by the police are connected with it and will be found at the location named in the warrant. In limited situations the police may search without a warrant, but they cannot use what they find at trial if the defense can show that there was no probable cause for the search.

HOT PURSUIT

An exception to the general rule that a police officer needs an arrest warrant before he can enter a home to make an arrest. If a felony has just occurred and a... (more...)

An exception to the general rule that a police officer needs an arrest warrant before he can enter a home to make an arrest. If a felony has just occurred and an officer has chased a suspect to a private house, the officer can forcefully enter the house in order to prevent the suspect from escaping or hiding or destroying evidence.

PROBABLE CAUSE

The amount and quality of information police must have before they can arrest or search without a warrant or that a judge must have before she will sign a searc... (more...)

The amount and quality of information police must have before they can arrest or search without a warrant or that a judge must have before she will sign a search warrant allowing the police to conduct a search or arrest a suspect. Reliable information must show that it's more likely than not that a crime has occurred and the suspect is involved.

PROSECUTE

When a local District Attorney, state Attorney General or federal United States Attorney brings a criminal case against a defendant.

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT

The burden of proof that the prosecution must carry in a criminal trial to obtain a guilty verdict. Reasonable doubt is sometimes explained as being convinced '... (more...)

The burden of proof that the prosecution must carry in a criminal trial to obtain a guilty verdict. Reasonable doubt is sometimes explained as being convinced 'to a moral certainty.' The jury must be convinced that the defendant committed each element of the crime before returning a guilty verdict.

MCNAGHTEN RULE

The earliest and most common test for criminal insanity, in which a criminal defendant is judged legally insane only if he could not distinguish right from wron... (more...)

The earliest and most common test for criminal insanity, in which a criminal defendant is judged legally insane only if he could not distinguish right from wrong at the time he committed the crime. For example, a delusional psychotic who believed that his assaultive acts were in response to the will of God would not be criminally responsible for his acts.

IRRESISTIBLE IMPULSE TEST

A seldom-used test for criminal insanity that labels the person insane if he could not control his actions when committing the crime, even though he knew his ac... (more...)

A seldom-used test for criminal insanity that labels the person insane if he could not control his actions when committing the crime, even though he knew his actions were wrong.

NOLO CONTENDERE

A plea entered by the defendant in response to being charged with a crime. If a defendant pleads nolo contendere, she neither admits nor denies that she committ... (more...)

A plea entered by the defendant in response to being charged with a crime. If a defendant pleads nolo contendere, she neither admits nor denies that she committed the crime, but agrees to a punishment (usually a fine or jail time) as if guilty. Usually, this type of plea is entered because it can't be used as an admission of guilt if a civil case is held after the criminal trial.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

State v. Underwood

... Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the grant of a defendant's motion to suppress the results of a State-administered breath test where an officer who had probable cause to arrest a defendant for DUI read the implied consent rights of OCGA Â§ 40-5-55[ [2] ] to the defendant ...

State v. Rish

... In granting that motion, the trial court found that the State lacked probable cause to arrest Rish for DUI-less safe (OCGA Â§ 40-6-391(a)(1)). While we affirm the trial court's ruling on this issue, we also find that, as a matter of law, the State did have probable cause to arrest Rish for ...

Wade v. State

... Following a bench trial, factually stipulated for trial purposes (to preclude the State's witnesses from having to appear), while preserving the due process issues for appellate review, Brittany Wade appeals her conviction of DUI less-safe, [1] contending that her bent of mind or ...

SORT BY:

FILTER BY:

Free Consultation
Male
Female
Suspended