TENNESSEE STATE SENATOR CHARGED WITH THEFT OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS

According to various news reports, earlier this week, Tennessee State Senator Katrina Robinson was indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly embezzling $600,000 in federal funds from a healthcare institute she operated.  According to a criminal complaint filed by a Memphis U.S. Attorney, Ms. Robinson improperly spent federal funds on numerous personal things, including a wedding, a divorce, and a vacation.

As a former federal prosecutor in Augusta, Georgia, I once handled many prosecutions like this one involving embezzlement of government funds.  One oddity I would note about this case is that, generally, when I prosecuted, I didn't first obtain a complaint and then indict.  I simply obtained an indictment.  In this case, it appears the prosecutor filed a complaint first, and then obtained an indictment.  Was this done in order to get juicy details about the facts of the case out into the public arena?  Maybe not.

Of course, every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

How Do You Find A Good, Experienced Criminal Lawyer?

In this blog about white collar crime, we generally try to give you good, interesting information about various hot topics in criminal law.  I also try, from time to time, to entertain you with some of my "war stories" from the court room. But we also try to give you some practical ideas and information about our criminal justice system for you to discuss with your own criminal lawyer.

Today, I want to focus on that last category -- and a topic which has become a pet peeve for me.  The topic is: How do you find a good, experienced criminal defense lawyer? Put another way, if you are in trouble with the law, should you simply call around and find the dirt cheapest lawyer out there!? That part is the part which bothers me!

As Augusta, Georgia criminal lawyers, (including over 26 years as a former state and federal prosecutor), every single day, we receive telephone calls and email inquiries from people all over Georgia who are looking for a criminal defense attorney. And sometimes, it seems that all some callers care about, (even if they have money), is hiring the cheapest criminal lawyer they can find. In my opinion, as a trial attorney who has seen both the best and the worst which the bar has to offer, that is a lousy approach!

Here are a few suggestions about finding the best criminal lawyer for your criminal case. First of all, we recommend that you talk with family and friends about their recommendations. Did Lawyer Smith really get Uncle Clem out of trouble? 

We also suggest that you actually make appointments and meet with several prospective attorneys. And ask them good, tough questions about their experience, including how many criminal cases, and what kind of criminal cases, they have tried. But that is just a start. The point is that, when your life and freedom are on the line, you should do your research and focus on finding the best, most experienced criminal lawyer -- and not just the cheapest lawyer -- which you can afford! 

Trust me, all criminal lawyers, just like all plumbers, barbers, or doctors, are NOT just alike. Many are experienced and competent; others are not. So, do your research. But please, please, please don't simply look for the cheapest lawyer you can find!

The Goolsby Law Firm Brag Board

[Photo of the Goolsby Law Firm located at 233 Davis Road, Augusta, GA]

I hope you don't mind if I, as a proud father, brag a little bit today about my second son, Blake Goolsby.  As you may know, I already practice law in Augusta, Georgia with my oldest son, Ric, and now, my second son, Blake Goolsby, will be joining us, later this summer, at the Goolsby Law Firm! (see here)  In other words, my second son, Blake, just graduated from Mercer Law School a week ago.  Now, he is studying for the Georgia Bar Exam before he joins us at our family law practice later this summer in Augusta. We are so proud of Blake and all his accomplishments!

Of course, I don't mean to overlook my third son, Zachary, who just completed his first year of law school at the University of Georgia, in Athens.  We are proud of Zach, too, and also look forward to him joining us at the Goolsby Law Firm in a couple of years, too!  We are truly a family law firm which handles a little bit of everything, including divorces, adoptions, personal injury, and criminal law, in both Georgia state and federal courts.

That's all for bragging about my sons today!  I hope you understood!

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Sentencing Disparities in Federal Court

If you have followed this blog, then you know that I am a former federal prosecutor, (for over 20 years), in Augusta, Georgia. You also probably realize that I still like to follow what's going on in federal court, even though I am now a criminal defense lawyer. In other words, I still handle federal criminal cases; I just sit at a different table and represent a different client when I go to federal court now!

This week, the Daily Report has featured a new issue involving federal sentencing. The article involves a request by the Department of Justice for the U.S. Sentencing Commission to investigate sentencing disparities by federal judges around the country. The article also mentions that the disparities are perhaps the greatest in fraud and child pornography cases. For instance, federal judges imposed sentences of one to four years in the AIG fraud case, (which involved more than $500 million in losses), but another federal judge sentenced a defendant involved in a $40 million Ponzi scheme to a whopping 25 years in prison. Numerous other examples abound. The article suggests that what (sentence) you get may depend on who (which judge) you get.

You might recall that, back in the 1980's, Congress enacted the federal sentencing guidelines to eliminate such sentencing disparities around the country. But then, five years ago, in Booker v. U.S., the Supreme Court struck down the mandatory nature of the guidelines and made them advisory. In other words, federal judges still check the sentencing guidelines, but they now have more discretion about not following them.

Will this new call by DOJ for a study of guidelines sentencing disparities do any good? I doubt it. And frankly, in many cases, maybe it's not such a bad thing that judges have discretion and can take into account the unique facts of each case in imposing sentences.

What do you think? Should sentences be more uniform? Or should judges have more discretion?

Special Challenges in Major White Collar Crime Prosecutions

I want to start a new periodic series in this blog about what it is like to be a federal prosecutor and how, as a former AUSA, I "put together" some of my major prosecutions. Trust me, a lot of planning and hard work goes into many federal criminal investigations. I also want to discuss some of the special challenges I faced, as an AUSA, in prosecuting high profile criminal cases.

As a former federal prosecutor in Augusta, Georgia, I was very lucky to be in the right place at the right times to try some of the largest federal fraud and public corruption cases in Georgia (and United States) history! For example, I tried the largest home healthcare Medicare fraud case and the largest vote-buying case in American history. But big cases often bring big challenges. For example, consider the following:

1. No Precedents to Guide You:
Being a federal prosecutor sometimes feels like being a Star Fleet Commander in Star Trek. Simply put, you confront new problems and new worlds never seen before! Put another way, for some of my major fraud investigations, there were no precedents to guide me. Now, don't get me wrong. The U.S. Department of Justice provides excellent resources and unparalleled training opportunities for federal prosecutors. But my point is that, in some of my major criminal cases, there were no prior criminal cases, or precedents, just like mine, and I was pretty much on my own to face them.

For example, I once prosecuted a major home health care fraud case in which the home healthcare agency owner was accused, among many other allegations, of falsely billing the Medicare and Medicaid programs for tens of thousands of dollars for a luxury Georgia Dome stadium suite, liquor, and parties. I had to determine whether or not this constituted Medicare fraud, i.e. a criminal matter, or whether it was simply a civil matter. In that case, I decided to include some of the allegations, (e.g. billing Medicare and Medicaid for tens of thousands in liquor billings), in my indictment, even though I could find no clear precedent. Fortunately, I prevailed later at trial! I could give you countless other examples.

The point is that, because there were no precedents, as a result, I often had no prosecution models, or sample indictments, to guide me. Instead, I had to do my own research, lead my own task force of agents and auditors where I wanted to go, and draft my own indictments. In other words, as a federal prosecutor, you sometimes must first research and determine whether or not the target's activities are criminal before you can really begin to prove it occurred.

But frankly, I enjoyed this special challenge of federal prosecution. I had a unique opportunity, as an AUSA, to "boldly go where no one has gone before!"

A Goolsby "War Story:" Winning and Lessons Learned From Losing!

As a former federal prosecutor, I was very fortunate to have won nearly every criminal case I ever tried. In fact, in my 20 year career as an AUSA, I lost only one jury trial. It was a relatively minor public corruption case. But the facts of that case aren't important here. And the reasons why I lost this one trial aren't particularly significant here, either.

Instead, the point of this post involves the important lessons I learned from losing this one case. In perspective, the trial occurred very early in my career. I had been a federal prosecutor for only about 18 months. I had expected and prepared to try another criminal case that week. The other case would have been a slam dunk. But that defendant pled guilty at the last minute and I was left to try this other case for which I was, quite frankly, less prepared. I also had a lousy federal agent helping me on the case I tried. For various reasons, I had not pushed him to produce a winning case. And we went down in flames! I felt horrible! To top it off, my parents had come to see me in action that week. Sadly, this one loss -- this one blemish on my otherwise perfect trial record -- would be the only jury trial my father would ever see me try! Sadly, he died soon thereafter.

But I learned some important lessons from this loss. For example, I learned never again to walk into a courtroom without being ready to try all of my cases. I also developed a better work ethic. I also learned never again to settle for a lazy agent's excuses for not helping me to get a case ready for trial. In short, I learned to demand more from myself and from my case agents. As a result, I never lost another federal case!

Looking back, I believe that losing this one case, early on, may have been instrumental in changing the rest of my career. It instilled in me a drive to succeed -- to never again feel the "agony of defeat!" As a result, I believe that this one loss is responsible for helping me never to lose again!

How has losing helped you to become a winner?

A Goolsby "War Story:" The Case of the Older Woman and Pretrial Diversion

In the last post, I discussed the pretrial diversion program, which is an available alternative to prosecution in the federal court system. In this post, I want to tell you a "war story" about a time I agreed to a defense lawyer's entreaties to afford his client this lenient alternative to prosecution. You be the prosecutor! You decide whether or not you would have done the same! Here are the facts:

The Department of Justice has well-publicized guidelines concerning which cases should qualify for pretrial diversion. As you would imagine, the cases should generally be very minor, non-violent crimes by first offenders. Once, years ago, as a young federal prosecutor, I was prosecuting a woman, easily in her mid-sixties, who was a local bank president, for embezzling bank funds. In particular, she was giving herself some unauthorized "extra" interest on some of her personal savings accounts. To me, it was a routine criminal case for which this defendant needed to "do some time," and also to serve as an example to others.

But then, I got a telephone call from her criminal defense attorney. He and I had worked together previously when we were both employed together at the district attorney's office. I trusted him implicitly to tell me the truth. The criminal defense lawyer proceeded to tell me that he was worried about this client possibly taking her life. He went on to explain that, in the past year, she had lost her husband and had fought her own battle against cancer. He also described other ordeals she had endured which I won't go into here. (And I have changed some of the facts here, too, but the essential facts remain). Her attorney seemed genuinely concerned about what she might do if she was prosecuted and sentenced to prison.

Here is the decision I made: After careful consultation with others, including my case agent, I agreed to give this defendant pretrial diversion, in lieu of prosecution. Ordinarily, since she was a bank executive, I wouldn't have considered it. But looking back, I am glad I did it. I became convinced that she might not make it to prison and, frankly, I had better things to do than to kill this older woman! So, if I erred, at least I erred on the side of life! What do you think? Was I too lenient? Was I hoodwinked? What would you have done if you were the prosecutor?

As another point, I am sure you will agree that prosecutors, when exercising prosecutorial discretion, should try to be be consistent from case to case, (but, at the same time, they must also consider the unique facts of each case). Should it matter that she was older and had suffered several serious tragedies in her life?

As a post script, when I informed the defense attorney about my decision, I also teased with him a bit and made him promise not to broadcast to the local criminal defense bar that I was a wimp! Instead, I told him that I expected him to tell everyone what a tough prosecutor I was!

A Goolsby "War Story:" The Dodge County Vote-Buying Case

"I couldn't wait to grow up, so I could get paid for voting." I will never forget those chilling words! They were spoken by an 18 year old young woman who I interviewed, (as a former federal prosecutor), while preparing for one of my biggest federal criminal cases: the Dodge County vote-buying case.

Dodge County is located in central Georgia, about an hour southeast of Macon, Georgia. It is a beautiful farming community and has some really good people who live there. But for decades, Dodge County had developed a bad reputation as a place where (some) candidates would pay voters for their votes. It had degenerated to the point where both sides in one contested election for Dodge County's sole county commissioner seat actually set up tables at opposite ends of the courthouse and supporters of the two candidates would openly bid for voters' votes as they entered the courthouse! Dodge County's sheriff was really smart. He had spread money out among vote-buyers in both county commission camps to buy votes for him! As a federal prosecutor, I was entrusted with the onerous task of prosecuting this vote-buying case and with trying to "clean up Dodge!"

Vote-buying is a federal crime, as long as a federal candidate is on the ballot. We prosecuted a total of 28 defendants. It was quite an ordeal! Fortunately, all were convicted, including the sheriff and both county commission candidates, along with a number of their supporters. The head of the Department of Justice Election Fraud Section has called this the largest election fraud case in United States history. I won my first D.O.J. Director's Award for this prosecution. But I certainly do not deserve all the credit. I was supported by an incredible team of agents from the G.B.I., the F.B.I., and the Georgia Secretary of State's Office. Without their fine work, we could not have been successful!

Awards and recognition are always nice. (Getting out of Dodge County with my skin was nice, too!) But I take greater satisfaction in believing we made a difference in how elections were conducted in this county. And I will always hope that no child in Dodge County will ever again associate growing up with getting paid to vote.

Reasons Why You Need An Experienced Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer For A Federal Criminal Case

There are so many kinds of lawyers "out there!" For example, there are divorce lawyers, real estate lawyers, personal injury attorneys, and bankruptcy lawyers, just to name a few. But did you know that there are also different kinds of criminal lawyers, based upon the types of criminal cases which they are experienced in handling?

So, what should you do if you are a target of a federal grand jury investigation? In other words, what kind of criminal lawyer do you need if you face potential federal criminal charges?

In my opinion, any person facing the possibility of a federal criminal indictment should try to find an experienced federal criminal defense lawyer, and not just any criminal defense attorney will do. Naturally, I will admit I am biased, because I am a former federal prosecutor who has over twenty years of experience in trying all types of criminal cases in federal court. But please also consider the following reasons why, in my opinion, you should look only for an experienced federal criminal lawyer to help you in this situation.

First of all, the federal court procedural rules are different. Most criminal lawyers, (even some outstanding advocates I know), who practice only in the state courts, essentially have no clue about the pretrial rules which apply in federal court. In federal court, the government must comply, for example, with the federal Speedy Trial Act and the Jencks Act. Also, many state criminal lawyers do not know the difference between a "Rule 11" and "Rule 16!"

In addition, an experienced federal criminal lawyer will more likely know the federal agents and prosecutors and how to plea bargain in federal court. Trust me, folks, things are different when you deal with the feds!

Also, jury selection rules and trial procedural rules are often different from the procedures followed by the state courts. While it is not always the case, sometimes federal criminal cases are also a lot more complex than state cases. As a result, federal criminal cases may also require a more sophisticated understanding of the federal charges and what the government must prove at trial. The difference between the two court systems is like the difference between playing checkers and chess!

Finally, sentencing in federal court is vastly different from sentencing in state court. In federal court, a criminal lawyer must be familiar with the infamous federal sentencing guidelines. These guidelines can be very complicated! At times, sentencing in a federal criminal case can resemble a "mini-trial."

So, have I convinced you to look for an experienced federal criminal defense attorney in your area for your federal criminal case?