Tennessee Criminal Lawyer Blog

Trucker Hits, Kills Woman While Watching Pornography

2010-09-03T19:19:05Z

One would imagine that life as a trucker would get pretty boring sometimes. Driving across America alone, day after day, for hours at a time with nothing to do would certainly leave one desiring to find some ways to pass the time. Forty-five year-old Thomas M. Wallace, a truck driver from Ohio, certainly knows how dull life on the road can be, so he decided to spice his journeys up a little bit by watching some pornography on his laptop computer while he drove to his next destination. Unfortunately, someone who is watching pornography probably isn’t watching the road and so Wallace apparently didn’t notice that he had veered off the roadway and into the shoulder. By the time he noticed, it was too late and he crashed into thirty-three year-old Julie Stratton who had pulled into the shoulder, killing her. Wallace recently pleaded guilty to second-degree manslaughter and was sentenced to three to nine years in prison.

]]> In Tennessee, Wallace would most likely be looking at a vehicular homicide charge, which is the reckless killing of another person by operating a motor vehicle in a way that poses a substantial risk of death or bodily injury to another person. This offense is a Class C felony in Tennessee and carries a penalty of up to fifteen years of incarceration.

In cases such as this one, there may not be a whole lot of ammunition for fighting the charges since watching pornography while you drive is reckless conduct that creates a substantial risk of injury to others, especially where the driver is operating a semi truck or other large commercial vehicle. However, the defendant can argue for a reduced sentence based on lack of criminal history or other mitigating factors that are recognized by Tennessee law. Defendants should seek the advice of a skilled criminal defense attorney for assistance throughout the trial process as well as guidance throughout the sentencing phase of trial should they be convicted.

Source: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/porn_watching_ohio_trucker_jailed_Srz8JAIYuCQ7BT0ZMt0yXM?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=

Drug Bust Made at Knoxville Bar

2010-09-02T22:50:45Z

Another Knoxville bar has been closed down under the nuisance law, resulting in the arrest of five patrons on whom police found an assortment of illegal drugs. The following patrons were cited for the following charges:

• Michael Penrod for sale or delivery of schedule II drugs • Michael Brown for sale or delivery of schedule I drugs, possession of schedule II drugs for resale and possession of schedule IV drugs for resale • Dean Koss for possession of schedule II drugs for resale • Wayne Sherrod for possession of schedule II drugs for resale • Jennifer Evans cited for possession of drug paraphernalia

]]>
In Tennessee, drug offense penalties are classified by schedules and by the amount of the drugs involved, with possession, sale, or manufacture of a Schedule I drug being the most serious and a Schedule VII drug being the least serious. Here, the defendants are mostly charged with possession or sale of Schedule II drugs. Schedule II contains substances such as cocaine, codeine, oxycodone, morphine, and methadone. In most circumstances, possession of Schedule II drugs with the intent to sell them is a Class C felony in Tennessee which carries a maximum of fifteen years of incarceration. Possession of Schedule IV drugs would obviously carry a less severe penalty and possession of drug paraphernalia is a misdemeanor in most cases.

Under Tennessee law, it is much more serious to possess drugs with the intent to sell them than merely possessing them for personal use (often known as “simple possession”). Thus, a key issue in many felony drug prosecutions is whether or not the defendant intended to sell the drugs that were in his possession or merely use them for his own purposes. This is usually determined by the amount and type of drugs in the defendant’s possession, the defendant’s criminal history, and the circumstances surrounding the arrest. An experienced criminal defense lawyer can assist a defendant in these cases in persuading the jury that the defendant did not intend to sell the drugs that were allegedly found in his possession, hopefully enabling the defendant to avoid a lengthy prison stay.

Source: http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=13086762

Challenging Vehicle Searches Resulting From Traffic Stops

2010-09-01T22:22:53Z

Every week, many Tennesseans all across the state are charged with drug or other offenses as a result of evidence uncovered by law enforcement officials pursuant to a routine traffic stop. In many such stops, the defendants feel like they have to allow the officers to search their car upon request, which simply isn’t true. Absent such consent, a search can only be conducted if the stop itself was valid (the officer must have reasonable suspicion to make the stop) and the officer has probable cause to conduct the search during the stop. Where a vehicle search is conducted and evidence of a crime is found, a defendant can face serious charges. The ability to prove that the stop was invalid can lead to suppression of the evidence and possibly result in the charges against the defendant being dropped.

]]> In order to make a legal traffic stop, the police officer must have reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed by the driver. This can be any crime that can give rise to a traffic stop, from speeding to failing to wear a seatbelt, but the officer must be able to show that the crime actually was or actually was about to be committed. An experienced criminal defense attorney can sometimes show the court that circumstances surrounding the stop indicate that the stop was actually illegal and that all of the evidence should be suppressed.

A good example of this can be found by looking at the case of State v. Feaster, where an officer pulled over the defendant for failing to signal a turn and eventually discovered that the defendant was in possession of cocaine. On appeal, the defense attorney was able to get the evidence suppressed because it was determined that the defendant’s failure to signal a turn did not violate Tennessee law because there was no proof that any other vehicle would be affected by the driver’s turn. If a turn or other movement will not affect any other driver, Tennessee law does not require the driver making the turn or movement to use his or her signal. Thus, the defendant in this case did not break the law and there was no reason for the defendant to be subjected to a traffic stop. This case provides a great example of how a skilled criminal defense attorney can protect a defendant from unreasonable searches and enable the defendant to avoid significant jail time.

Source: State v. Feaster, 35 TAM 35-21, 7/21/10, Nashville, Welles, 18 pages.

Greene County Man Facing Vehicular Homicide Charge

2010-08-31T21:15:13Z

Twenty-one year-old Jeffrey Brian-Edward Wills of Mosheim, Tennessee is facing several charges after authorities say he intentionally ran the SUV of nineteen year-old Jackie Ricker of Rheatown off the road, causing Ms. Ricker to be killed in the wreck. Mr. Wills was reportedly driving at a high rate of speed when he intentionally hit the Ford Explorer driven by Ms. Ricker, causing her car to drive into an embankment. Ms. Ricker was killed in the crash and two of her passengers, 31-year-old Sammy Shanks of Greeneville and 29-year-old Nancy Wills of Rheatown were injured and taken to Johnson City Medical Center. The personal injury ramifications of this situation are discussed here.

]]> Mr. Wills is facing charges of vehicular homicide, vehicular assault, and felony reckless endangerment. Of these, the most serious is the offense of vehicular homicide. Vehicular homicide is basically defined as the killing of another person through the reckless operation of a vehicle as the result of conduct creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to that person. In Mr. Wills’ case that definition is clearly met if the situation is as reported, because he intentionally wrecked another vehicle and caused the death of the driver. Vehicular homicide when the offending driver is not intoxicated is a Class C felony, punishable by up to fifteen years in prison.

The best defense in such a situation would probably be proving that the driver did not act recklessly or that the conduct that he or she engaged in was not the type of conduct that creates a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to other drivers. This may be tough to do where the driver seems to be responsible for the accident and the other driver dies as a result. However, an experienced criminal defense attorney can assist the defendant in persuading a jury that the driver was not driving in a manner that should result in his or her being prosecuted under the statute.

Source: http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=132369&catid=2

No Period of Confinement is Too Small for Kidnapping Charge

2010-08-30T19:08:18Z

When most people think of the crime of kidnapping, they envision someone being abducted from their home and taken to some remote location and held for ransom. In the real world, however, kidnapping scenarios often don't play out that way and Tennessee law allows for kidnapping to be charged when the period of confinement is as short as a few seconds.

In Tennessee, kidnapping is defined as knowingly removing or confining another person unlawfully so as to interfere substantially with that person's liberty (this is the definition of the offense of false imprisonment) under circumstances that expose that person to substantial risk of bodily injury (this additional element is what turns false imprisonment into kidnapping). It is noteworthy then, that there is no duration requirement whatsoever and that Tennessee courts have not read one into the statute as of yet.

]]>
As an example, one can look to the case of State v. Hardy, where the defendant was convicted of especially aggravated kidnapping for holding a knife to the defendant's throat and moving her a distance of five feet. Although this was a very brief episode, the appellate court held that it was sufficient to constitute kidnapping because moving someone five feet counts as "removing or confining" that person as contemplated by the statute and that the amount of time for which the person was confined is immaterial. Thus, in Tennessee a person can be kidnapped for a matter of seconds, which may lead to defendants facing such charges when they would never have contemplated that they committed a kidnapping offense.

The offense of kidnapping is a "knowing" offense, so the defentdant may be able to fight such a charge by arguing that he or she did not knowingly remove or confine the victim or that the victim was not removed or confined at all. Kidnapping is a felony in Tennessee and carries a risk of substantial prison. Thus, Tennesseans who are facing such a charge should seek the assistance of a skilled criminal defense attorney who can help the defendant to present the best possible defense.

Source: 35 TAM 35-17, 7/21/10, Jackson, McLin, 8 pages

Man Charged with Assault for Punching Coach

2010-08-19T15:57:33Z

Any parent knows that few things get the blood pumping like the sporting events of one’s children. Many a dispute takes place every year between parents or between a parent and a coach over issues such as kids being too rough, lack of playing time, etc. Unfortunately such disputes often turn physical and one or more of the adults makes a poor decision and ends up facing criminal charges. Such is the case with 43-year-old John Paul Gomoljack who was reportedly arrested on Tuesday for allegedly pushing and striking Heritage Middle School coach Lee Nachand in a dispute over his son’s playing time. At the time of the arrest, Gomoljack was apparently booked under the wrong name and did not notify authorities that the name was incorrect, according to this article. He has been charged with assault.

]]> One unfortunate fact about life is that good people often make bad decisions, especially when situations become heated or when the cause of the controversy is something about which an individual is passionate. As shown in the situation above, such decisions often lead to criminal charges and the possibility of jail time. In this case, the defendant seems to have been charged with simple assault which is a Class A or B misdemeanor depending on the circumstances. Thus, he will be facing the possibility of six months to almost a year in prison. The good news for the defendant and similarly situated Tennesseans, however, is that Tennessee law recognizes that good people can make mistakes and allows for processes such as pretrial diversion, judicial deferral, and other alternative sentences that allow a qualified defendant to avoid jail time if he or she is convicted or pleads guilty. Tennesseans who wish to explore such options should contact an experienced Knoxville criminal defense attorney who can assist them throughout the trial and sentencing process.

Knoxville Man Found Stuck in Chimney

2010-08-18T21:28:49Z

Unless you are Santa Claus, people probably aren’t going to take kindly to finding you stuck in their chimney. In fact, doing so will probably earn you a host of criminal charges just as it has for twenty-two year-old William Hussey of Chapel Hill, North Carolina who was found stuck in a chimney in South Knoxville early last Friday morning. There is no indication of exactly why the man decided to try to go through the chimney at around midnight on Friday but he apparently got stuck and rescue workers had to use rope to hoist him to safety. They also found his vehicle in the driveway of the home with seven cans of gasoline sitting inside. There is no word of what his plans were for the gasoline. He is charged with public intoxication, vandalism, and aggravated trespassing. Hussey told officers that it was not his intention to hurt anyone and that he was having mental issues.

]]> Mr. Hussey may have gotten lucky in this situation because attempting to enter a house through a chimney could be considered burglary, a felony, as the Tennessee statute is written. As it stands, however, he was only charged with aggravated trespass for his act of climbing into the chimney. Depending on the circumstances, this is either a Class A misdemeanor punishable by up to eleven months and twenty-nine days in jail or a Class B misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail.

The fact remains in this situation that Mr. Hussey is still facing quite a bit of jail time if he is convicted on the misdemeanor charges. When Tennesseans find themselves in similar situations they should recognize that even when they are only facing misdemeanor charges, the possibility of going to jail still exists. Defendants in such circumstances should consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney who may be able to work out some sort of arrangement that keeps the defendant from spending time in jail and allows them an alternative means of punishment such as diversion, deferral, or some other form of alternative sentence.

Source: http://www.wbir.com/news/watercooler/story.aspx?storyid=130561&catid=141

Traffic Stop Results in Burglary Arrests

2010-08-17T17:46:45Z

Last month, twenty year-old Jacob Hurst of Tazewell, TN and his nineteen year-old female companion were arrested as suspects in connection with multiple burglaries that had recently taken place in Claiborne County after a routine traffic stop and ensuing vehicle search uncovered a significant amount of cash and other valuables that were believed to have been taken during the robberies. Apparently, a full-scale investigation was launched into the robberies after the evidence was uncovered during the stop and the authorities now believe that Mr. Hurst and his companion were responsible for the slew of robberies. The robberies are now considered “solved” according to reports.

]]> Routine traffic stops often lead to more serious charges when officers conduct a search of the interior of a vehicle. Vehicle searches often lead to evidence being uncovered of offenses such as drug possession and sometimes, as here, uncover evidence of felony offenses such as burglary. The discovery of such evidence puts the defendant in a very difficult situation, but not a situation that is hopeless. An experienced criminal defense attorney may be able to examine the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the evidence and have that evidence suppressed at trial.

For evidence of a crime uncovered by a vehicle search to be admissible in court, the traffic stop and ensuing search must both have been legal. In Tennessee, that means that the police officer must have had reasonable suspicion that the driver was engaging in, or was about to engage in, some sort of illegal activity (this encompasses all forms of illegal activity such as speeding or driving with no seatbelt). Once the stop is initiated, the officer must have probable cause to search the vehicle unless the driver consents to the search. This consent must be voluntary and cannot have been coerced or a product of police intimidation. Tennesseans who have found themselves charged with a crime as a result of such a search should contact a skilled East Tennessee criminal defense attorney for assistance in fighting the charges.

Source: http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=128882&odyssey=obnetwork

Facebook Mishap Leads to Arrest

2010-08-16T21:10:01Z

Social media is all the rage nowadays, and the website Facebook has quickly become one of the most popular websites in the world. The website is so popular, in fact, that many people are becoming addicted to it, feeling the need to check their Facebook at all hours of the day and night regardless of where they are. For an example of how devoted people are becoming to this website, look at the example provided by nineteen year-old Douglas Wilgo of Beverly, Massachusetts. Mr. Wilgo was allegedly in the process of burglarizing a Massachusetts apartment when the urge to check his Facebook overcame him. He promptly used the homeowner’s computer to log in to Facebook, took care of all pressing Facebook matters, and then left the apartment without signing out or logging off. Thus, when police arrived to investigate the burglary, they found the alleged suspect still signed into Facebook on the homeowner’s computer and had no trouble tracking Mr. Wilgo down from there. Making the arrest even easier was the fact that Mr. Wilgo was apparently walking a dog that he had taken from the apartment at the time of his arrest.

]]> It is unlikely that Mr. Wilgo is going to be able to claim that he was innocent in this situation unless he claims that someone broke into the house and then framed him by using Facebook. More likely, Mr. Wilgo will have to hope he is offered some form of alternative sentencing or receives a lenient sentence from the court should he be convicted at trial. Tennesseans who are in similar situations may be able to obtain some form of diversion or probation which would enable them to avoid jail time. An experienced criminal defense attorney who is familiar with criminal procedure and the judicial process can guide a defendant through situations such as the one above that may seem hopeless and can often allow the defendant to achieve a more lenient resolution than the defendant thought possible.

Source: http://www.wickedlocal.com/danvers/news/x297556044/Facebook-login-trips-up-alleged-Beverly-felon-in-Danvers

The Defense of Necessity

2010-08-12T20:06:54Z

A major theme underlying Tennessee’s criminal code is that it is designed to protect Tennesseans from harm, especially serious harm such as death or serious bodily injury. For example, Tennessee’s criminal code would be doing Tennesseans a disservice if it were to punish them with a criminal charge, such as assault, for taking an action that ordinarily may be a criminal act but in the instant case actually operates to protect someone from even greater harm. For example, it would ordinarily be a crime to shove someone out a window, but such an act may not be criminal if it was done in order to get that person out of a burning house. Thus, Tennessee law contains the doctrine of necessity in order to distinguish criminal acts from those helpful acts society wants to encourage.

]]> For a person to assert the defense of necessity, he or she must (1) reasonably believe that the conduct is necessary to avoid imminent harm, and (2) society’s interest in avoiding the harm must clearly outweigh the harm sought to be prevented by the statute allegedly violated. For example, a person could claim necessity as a defense if they used a baseball bat to stop someone from kidnapping another person’s child. That person could not, however, claim necessity if they used a baseball bat to stop an offender from running off with another person’s taco. Simply put, the actions of the person claiming necessity must be designed to prevent a greater harm than that person actually commits against someone else.

Claims of necessity often present close cases that are not as easily distinguished as the kidnapping-taco dichotomy above. Often necessity cases involve the use of deadly force that has poses the threat of serious charges, such as homicide, to the defendant. Defendants in such cases need to rely on the advice of experienced criminal defense lawyers in order to ensure that the defense of necessity is appropriately and effectively presented.

Over 1,300 Dashboard Camera Videos Erased From Metro Police Database

2010-08-11T15:27:53Z

An attempted software update by a third-party vendor went horribly wrong and has resulted in the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department losing over 1,300 dashboard camera videos that were taken from cameras mounted inside its police cruisers. While most of the lost footage would have depicted routine traffic stops, some footage of DUI stops was also lost, according to a Metro police spokesman. The loss of DUI footage will have a substantial impact on both the state and the defendant in cases affected by the lost video.

]]> The dashboard camera footage of a DUI stop is often essential in determining whether or not the defendant in a DUI case should be convicted. Where such footage is lost, the surrounding circumstances will determine whether the state or the defendant is adversely affected. If the dashboard camera footage is the only real evidence the state possesses that the defendant was driving under the influence (for example, if the defendant did not blow a .08 or higher on a breathalyzer but the officer felt like the defendant was intoxicated based on his performance during field sobriety tests), then the state may elect not to proceed to trial at all with such little tangible evidence that the defendant was impaired. If, however, the camera footage was favorable to the defendant and showed the defendant performing extremely well on field sobriety tests, then the defendant may be put in a situation where it is the word of the defendant against the officer at trial, a situation from which defendants rarely emerge victorious.

Mishaps such as losing video footage are rare but can happen and at inconvenient times for defendants or in situations where they severely weaken a defendant’s case. Thus, it is essential for Tennesseans in such cases to be represented by a skilled criminal defense attorney who can work to protect the defendant’s rights when unanticipated mishaps arise that impact the defendant’s case and present the strongest argument possible for the innocence of the defendant using the evidence that remains available.

Source: http://www.wbir.com/news/watercooler/story.aspx?storyid=129756&catid=141

Endangered Child Alert Issued for Crossville Children

2010-08-10T16:32:30Z

On the heels of yesterday's blog article discussing the offense of custodial interference in Tennessee comes a possible real-life example of custodial interference pertaining to the taking of two Crossville children, 2 year-old Anna Shuey and 5 year-old Kylie Shuey, by their biological father, Richard Shuey, from the apparent custody of the childrens' grandmother. It should be noted that all of the facts surrounding this situation are not known and that this case is merely being analyzed in this blog as a possible case of custodial interference. Mr. Shuey is innocent of any and all crimes until his guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

]]> The key to determining whether the situation presented here constitutes custodial interference is to determine the intent of the suspect. For Mr. Shuey to be guilty of custodial interference under Tennessee law, it is not enough to prove that he took his children from his grandmother while they were in her care. The state must also show that he took the children out of state knowing that taking the kids out of state violated a custody judgment or order by the court, violated the custody rights of the mother, or violated some other valid custody determination or detained the child within the state even though his right to visitation had lawfully expired, with the intent to violate one of the aforementioned custody situations.

If the facts of the situation reveal that the father took the kids from the grandmother by physically assaulting her when he had a lawful custody expectation, he might be guilty of another offense, such as aggravated assault or simple assault, but he would not be guilty of custodial interference as defined by Tennessee law. Thus, this situation shows how every element of a crime is important and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Tennesseans who find themselves charged with any crime should consult an experienced criminal defense attorney who will force the prosecution to work hard to prove every single element of any alleged offense.

Custodial Interference in Tennessee

2010-08-09T20:06:14Z

Few situations have the potential to spiral out of control like custody disputes. Very often, two parents are fighting over custody who genuinely believe that the best interest of the child dictates that the child lives with them at least a majority of the time. Also, custody disputes occasionally involve parents who are trying to gain custody of the child simply to inflict pain or sadness on the other parent. Whatever the cause, custody disputes have a tendency to get ugly, especially when a parent or relative decides to take matters into his or her own hands.

]]> Situations where a parent or relative takes the child in violation of a custody order or agreement and absconds to some far-off location frequently make the national headlines. Such cases usually do not result in harm to the child, but they certainly have the potential to do so. Thus, the State of Tennessee has decided to criminalize such behavior by creating the crime of custodial interference. The offense of custodial interference makes it a crime for a natural or adoptive parent, step-parent, grandparent, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, or nephew of a child under the age of 18 to wrongfully remove that child from the state or from the custody of the mother knowing that such removal violates a custody order or is otherwise wrongful. There are several different ways offenders can be brought within the ambit of this statute and persons charged with custodial interference should contact an experienced criminal defense attorney for assistance in sorting through and defending the charges.

Due to the nature of the statute, several defenses exist to most forms of custodial interference, including lack of requisite criminal intent or being mistaken as to the identity of the child or the custodial situation. The defendant can also prove that he returned the child voluntarily to the appropriate custodian in order to receive a reduced charge. Custodial interference is a Class E felony, punishable by more than a year in prison in most cases. Voluntarily returning the victim, however, may knock that down to a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by eleven months and twenty-nine days maximum. Defendants charged with this crime should consult a skilled criminal defense attorney in order to present the best possible defense.

East Tennessee Man Pleads Guilty to Distributing Child Pornography

2010-08-06T17:40:07Z

Forty-three year old Steven Blaine Church of Greeneville pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court Thursday to distributing child pornography. He reportedly faces up to twenty years in prison, heavy fines, and a possible lifetime of supervised release. Church’s distribution of the illegal material was discovered by the FBI’s Innocent Images Project which is an initiative that the FBI started in 1995 to combat the proliferation of child pornography. That initiative has expanded recently to include undercover operations where FBI agents assume fictitious screen names and ages in order to lure sex predators and child pornography distributors into online relationships and gather evidence against them. Such undercover operations are becoming an increasingly prevalent source of sex offense charges nationwide.

]]> Tennesseans who find themselves charged with the distribution of child pornography have several options available for their defense. Successful pursuit of these options requires knowledge of the law and the legal system, and the ability to present persuasive legal arguments to the court. Therefore, it is highly recommended that defendants consult an experienced criminal defense attorney for help with such cases. One such option would, of course, consist of trying to prove that the defendant did not actually possess child pornography. This could be accomplished by proving that the material belonged to someone else or that the material does not actually depict child pornography at is defined by Tennessee or Federal law. If such material does depict child pornography, the defendant may still be able to prove that he was not aware of that and thus did not knowingly possess the images.

In rare situations, the defendant may be able to have the evidence suppressed due to an illegally conducted search, usually based on an invalid search warrant or invalid consent. If the defendant is able to get the evidence suppressed, he or she stands a good chance of acquittal or an extremely favorable plea bargain since there may be very little evidence entered against him or her at trial. Finally, the defendant can also accept a plea bargain as Mr. Church did here when the circumstances dictate that pleading guilty is appropriate. Plea bargains generally result in at least some lenience being shown to the defendant by the sentencing court due to the fact that avoiding trial preserves judicial resources and the defendant has accepted responsibility for his actions.

Source: http://www.wate.com/Global/story.asp?S=12938170

Miami Woman Stiffs Botox Clinic

2010-08-05T18:59:10Z

A 29 year-old Miami Beach woman was arrested on Monday for allegedly stealing over $4,000 worth of services from a Fort Lauderdale area Botox clinic. The woman, who was dubbed the “Botox Bandit,” (a nickname she reportedly adopted for herself because she liked it so well) because she had taken free services from several Florida services by walking out without paying or writing bad checks after receiving the services. The Botox Bandit was less-than-devastates upon being arrested, the source article says, as she reportedly asked to check her Facebook to see if her arrest had been publicized yet, was concerned about how her hair looked, and was reportedly disappointed that the media was not on-hand to capture her arrest.

]]> Three quick tips for Tennesseans who find themselves in a similar situation: 1) Do contact your attorney immediately, 2) Do not ask to check your Facebook mid-arrest, and 3) Do not adopt a criminal nickname for yourself. Adherence to these three rules should help any arrest and ensuing trial proceed more smoothly.

Tennessee has merged several different offenses into the offense of theft and the Botox Bandit would likely be charged with theft of services under the Tennessee Code, most likely in the aggregate amount of all of the services she had acquired in this manner. The amount stolen would determine the severity of the charge, with the offender being charged with a felony if the amount of the theft is over $500. If the amounts total more than $60,000, the offender will be charged with a Class B felony which is the most serious possible theft charge in Tennessee. Tennesseans who find themselves in similar situations need an experienced criminal defense attorney who can convince the prosecution to reduce the charges if at all possible and work toward a favorable resolution of the case.

Source: http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-08-03/news/fl-beauty-bandit-arrest-20100803_1_miami-police-botox-bandit-theft-case