Property Invasion, Damages, Trespass Criminal Trespass

B

Big Tom

New Member
Jurisdiction
Georgia
GA Criminal Trespass

(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person.

Accused struck mailbox with vehicle after midnight. Accused was arrested next morning and charged with criminal trespass. Once accused was bailed out, lawyer recommended that accused contacted property owner to apologize, offer repairs, and compensate for repairs already complete. No eye witnesses to actual incident and accused did not discuss incident with police or make statement. Physical evidence from accused vehicle found at scene by investigating officer. No negative history between accused and damaged property owner.

How does the DA prove that the accused intentionally damaged property?
 
Big Tom said:
How does the DA prove that the accused intentionally damaged property?
Click to expand...

With circumstantial evidence in the hope that the judge or jury believes.

That's why the accused was smart to not contact the victim, and not make statements to the police.

The accused should be firing the lawyer who suggested contacting the victim because that lawyer is an idiot. Watch this video to see why:

 
Thank you. Accused wanted to make right to property owner but also wanted to protect themselves by hiring lawyer for legal guidance. Accused had intuition that contacting victim with charges pending could negatively impact defense. Accused is clinging to hope that hired attorney has proper connections to still get positive outcome.
 
Big Tom said:
Thank you. Accused wanted to make right to property owner but also wanted to protect themselves by hiring lawyer for legal guidance. Accused had intuition that contacting victim with charges pending could negatively impact defense. Accused is clinging to hope that hired attorney has proper connections to still get positive outcome.
Click to expand...

A criminal defendant is barred from contacting any witnesses or victims in any criminal matter.

That alone is reason enough to seek clarification about the advice given by the current attorney.

The best rule of thumb for all criminal defendants is simply lay low, stay out of aditional legal issues while the case is pending, and stop talking about the incident to anyone but the defendant's attorney!!!!!
 
Accused went to arraignment today and was given pretrail diversion for 6 months. Attorney never discussed deal with client prior to being called before judge and DA. Accused realizes that this is the safest way to achieve desired outcome but never had opportunity to process what they were doing or consequences associated. Accused would like to know if these deals are offered last minute or if representing attorney failed to counsel client?
 
Big Tom said:
Accused would like to know if these deals are offered last minute or if representing attorney failed to counsel client?
Click to expand...

I don't know HOW its done in your county and state.

I know how it is SUPPOSED to be done in EVERY state and county.

The defendant's attorney is supposed to explain the deal to the client.
The client is given an opportunity to ask questions, seek clarification, and even time to think about the plea.
The accused isn't required to respond without deliberation.
The state, like every other opposition in your life, uses your fear and anxiety against you.
Most defendants are eager to have the trouble over, so quickly say YES.

Any and all convictions become the gift that keeps on giving.

In this country, our civilian system of justice uses the term DEFENDANT.

The military UCMJ uses accused.

Each noun has a very specific connotation.

I have plied my profession in BOTH systems, and suggest to all who listen, the UCMJ is far and away fairer.
 
Then my guess is that the deals are routinely offered at the last minute when the defendant is at his most desperate.

As for the attorney failing to counsel the defendant, I find it hard to believe that the attorney and the defendant didn't have some discussion about options. Maybe you aren't getting the full story, just the accused's "defendant remorse" about accepting the plea instead of risking a trial.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top