David Raybin represents Dr. Jeannie Beauchamp, a Clarksville, Tennessee area dentist, who was recently charged for illegal possession of prescription painkillers after being stopped by Nashville Airport Police en route to Haiti to provide medical attention.
The Leaf Chronicle's Article detailing this case
David Raybin recently filed a lawsuit against the state of Tennessee, the Governor of Tennessee, and the Attorney General of Tennessee after his client was denied a right to purchase a firearm even after receiving a full pardon from his conviction in the state of Georgia, which had restored his clients full rights of citizenship.
Tennessee Code Annotated 40-28-105 establishes the procedures relating to Parole Hearings in Tennessee. Pursuant to such statute, parole hearings are held in jails, department of correction facilities, and other locations within the state where eligible offenders come under the review of the Board of Probation and Parole. Parole Members preside over hearings or may designate hearing officers to conduct such hearings. At such hearings, parole board members or designated hearing officers take testimony and make proposed findings of fact and recommendations to the board regarding a grant, denial, revocation or rescission of parole. The findings and recommendations are reviewed by parole board members who adopt, modify, or reject the recommendations. The grant of parole requires the concurrence of 3 members in many cases, but in the most serious offenses under 40-28-105(d)(4), four votes are required.
David Raybin, notes in this Tennessean article, that the new immigration ruling by the United States Supreme Court is "the immigrant's Miranda rule." The Court ruled that changes to immigration law have dramatically raised the stakes of a noncitizen's criminal conviction. Because the drastic measure of deportation or removal is now virtually inevitable for a vast number of noncitizens convicted of crimes, the importance of accurate legal advice for noncitizens accused of crimes has never been more important. There will, however, undoubtedly be numerous situations in which the deportation consequences of a plea are unclear. In those cases, a criminal defense attorney need do no more than advise a noncitizen client that pending criminal charges may carry adverse immigration consequences. But when the deportation consequence is truly clear the duty to give correct advice is equally clear. Many States -but certainly not all - require judges to provide a general advisement to a defendant before accepting a guilty plea, warning the defendant that if he or she is a noncitizen the conviction may result in adverse immigration consequences. Tennessee does not require this but probably will in time. This does not alter the lawyer's responsibility to give appropriate advice.
Link to Tennessean article quoting David Raybin on new immigration ruling
In Davidson County (Nashville, Tennessee), the General Sessions and Criminal Courts require a bond source hearing pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated 39-11-715 before any bond can be posted of $75,000 or more or before any person can post a cash bond of $10,000 or more.
The courts have the authority to require such source hearings to ensure that proceeds that are directly or indirectly derived from a criminal offense are not used to secure a bond or pay a premium bond. The burden of proof is on the party seeking to post the bond to get the approval of the court.
If you need an assistance with obtaining a source hearing or any other criminal matter, feel free to call Vince Wyatt or David Raybin at (615) 256-6666.
In a recent Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals decision in State v. Teddy Ray Mitchell, the court found that the Defendant's actions by arguing with police officers did not violate the law against disorderly conduct. In this case, the Defendant attended a rally at the County Courthouse. He was confronted by officers initially for parking in an area that had been designated as a "no parking zone" due to the rally and then he was later confronted for attempting to bring an American flag on a standard flagpole to the rally as flagpoles had been prohibited due to concerns that they could be used as weapons. The police officers testified at the trial that when they confronted the Defendant that he became irate and belligerent and used the flagpole against one of the officers when the officers arrested him. After a jury trial, Mr. Mitchell was acquitted of the resisting arrest charges but was found guilty of disorderly conduct and sentenced to thirty days in jail. The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the decision holding that the proof did not demonstrate that the Defendant acted in a threatening manner.
If you are charged with disorderly conduct or any criminal offense, do not hesitate to contact Vince Wyatt or David Raybin at 615.256.6666.
Apr 30, 10 02:04 PM Lawyer defends Clarksville Dentist charge with Drug offense in Haiti Mission David Raybin represents Dr. Jeannie Beauchamp, a Clarksville, Tennessee area dentist, who was recently charged...
Apr 30, 10 01:37 PM Pardoned convict sues Tennessee over right to bear arms David Raybin recently filed a lawsuit against the state of Tennessee, the Governor of Tennessee,...
Apr 30, 10 11:15 AM Tennessee Parole Hearings Tennessee Code Annotated 40-28-105 establishes the procedures relating to Parole Hearings in Tennessee. Pursuant to...
Apr 11, 10 03:14 PM Nashville Criminal Defense Lawyer comments about the New Immigration ruling. David Raybin, notes in this Tennessean article, that the new immigration ruling by the United...
Apr 9, 10 09:44 AM Bond Source Hearing Required in Davidson County (Nashville) In Davidson County (Nashville, Tennessee), the General Sessions and Criminal Courts require a bond source...
Apr 2, 10 11:12 AM Arguing with Police Officers does not equal Disorderly Conduct In a recent Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals decision in State v. Teddy Ray Mitchell,...
