JPLattimoreLegal

Search and Seizure Motions

A major component of effective representation on criminal matters involves drafting and arguing motions to suppress – a request for a judge to prevent the government from introducing evidence because it was obtained by the police in violation of a person’s federal and/or state constitutional rights. It is a crucial aspect of criminal defense because a successful argument to suppress evidence can lead to a dismissal of a drug or firearm case.

 

Attorney Lattimore prides himself on staying on top of developments in search and seizure law and drafting cutting-edge motions challenging unlawful actions by the police.

 

The following are real cases in Attorney Lattimore's career, where he succeeded in getting evidence suppressed:

 

A young man was charged with possession of crack cocaine with intent to distribute after a police officer recovered substances from the defendant’s mouth. Attorney Lattimore persuaded the judge to throw out the evidence because the police officer illegally stopped the defendant.

 

 Attorney Lattimore succeeded in convincing a judge to suppress dozens of pills recovered from a man’s backpack after he was stopped on the street by the police. The judge agreed that the officer violated the defendant’s constitutional rights because he had no basis for stopping the defendant on the street.

 

Attorney Lattimore won a motion to suppress crack cocaine recovered from a man’s jacket pocket after a routine traffic stop. The judge agreed with Attorney Lattimore’s position that the officer had no justification for entering the car and searching the jacket.

 

Attorney Lattimore was successful on a motion to suppress marijuana that was the basis for a possession with intent to distribute charge. The judge agreed with Attorney Lattimore’s argument that the officer did not have a lawful basis for pat-frisking the man.

 

Attorney Lattimore succeeded in convincing a judge to throw out his client’s recorded statement to the police. The judge agreed that the detective conducting the interrogation violated the defendant’s constitutional right to counsel.

 

Attorney Lattimore won a motion to suppress cocaine recovered from a man when the police executed a search warrant at an apartment. The judge agreed that the warrant was overbroad because it contained an invalid provision to search “any person present” in the apartment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trial Experience

Criminal cases go to trial when they can’t be resolved by way of a plea or other disposition. A trial is a significant event where a person’s liberty is truly on the line, so a defense lawyer must be prepared for all facets of the trial – from selecting a jury to the final argument. A skilled trial lawyer has a good presence in front of a jury, and he knows what approaches and defense theories are effective in persuading a jury that the government has not proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

The following are some cases where Attorney Lattimore has secured not guilty verdicts for his clients in trials.

 

A bank manager with no prior criminal history was charged with stealing a significant amount of cash from a financial institution.  Attorney Lattimore focused on the bank's poor internal investigation to successfully argue to the jury that this was a classic rush to judgment without supporting evidence.

 

Attorney Lattimore represented a man charged with unlawful possession of a loaded firearm found on top of a backpack in a car. The car was occupied by the client and three other people, and all of them exited the car when the police pulled the car over for a traffic infraction. Using fingerprint and DNA evidence, Attorney Lattimore was successful in arguing to the jury that the evidence showed that the front seat passengers controlled the firearm.

 

A not guilty verdict was returned against a 70 year old man charged with drunk driving after his car broke down in the middle of the road.  Attorney Lattimore highlighted the client's difficulty with the English language and the police failure to conduct a thorough investigation of the matter.

 

Attorney Lattimore successfully defended a man whose ex-girlfriend brought a charge against him for violation of a restraining order. The defense centered on the girlfriend’s lack of credibility and her motive for accusing the defendant of the crime.

 

A young man was charged with drunk driving after his car slid into a traffic sign in the median.  Attorney Lattimore introduced evidence that the car had brake problems, and also brought out the defendant's solid perfomance on field sobriety tests during cross examination of the officers.

 

Attorney Lattimore helped bring about a not guilty verdict for a woman accused of assault and battery on her 2 year old child. By highlighting the motive of the complaining witness (her neighbor) for bringing the accusation against the defendant, Attorney Lattimore was able to successfully argue to the jury that they could not trust the neighbor’s testimony beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

A not guilty verdict was returned against a man accused of assault and battery on his cousin. The successful defense theory focused on the long-running tension between the cousin and the defendant and his family. It created a powerful motive for bringing the accusation against the defendant and gave the jury a reasonable doubt about the incident.

 

Attorney Lattimore’s client was found not guilty of driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs. The man was found unconscious in the driver’s seat by a police officer, and a pipe for smoking drugs was recovered as well. The judge agreed with Attorney Lattimore that the government did not present sufficient evidence to show that the man was under the influence of a particular drug.

 

Attorney Lattimore secured a not guilty verdict for a client charged with possession of drugs found in a car. The judge agreed that the evidence did not show that the defendant, a passenger in the car, controlled the drugs.

 

*This is a representative sample of cases in Attorney Lattimore's career.  Each case is different.  Results on criminal cases cannot be guaranteed.