Canton Criminal Defense Attorney

The Cherokee County Lawyer Who Fights For You

If you have been arrested for a crime in Georgia, you will need a highly skilled and experienced criminal defense attorney at your side. Attorney Matthews has successfully defended misdemeanor and felony cases in Georgia since 1986! Contact us today for a free consultation. We have dealt with a vast variety of criminal defense cases over the years, handling everything from violent offenses to sex crimes, traffic crimes, theft offenses, drug crimes, DUIs, and appeals and habeas corpus.

Battle Plan

Our firm will provide you with an aggressive and innovative defense that is tailored to you. Rather than assuming that you are guilty and pressuring you into take a plea bargain – as many public defenders will do – we examine all the details and facts of the case in order provide you with the best defense possible. We are available 24/7 to get to work on your case and begin providing you with the best criminal defense that Canton has to offer.

Protecting You Is Our Top Priority

If you are not sure whether or not you need a professional criminal defense lawyer at your side, trust us – you do. Without an attorney, you are putting yourself at a greater risk of conviction facing the full penalty of the law. While we cannot guarantee that you will be released and the charges against you will be dropped or that the verdict of the trial will be Innocent, we can guarantee that we will uphold your constitutional rights. If any courtroom or juror error occurs, or if your rights to a fair trial are infringed upon, we will jump into action immediately. You can call us at (404) 642-7350 for a free consult!

Serving Canton, Keithsburg, Waleska, Holly Springs, and Buffington

There are lots of good attorneys out there and it’s hard to distinguish oneself from the pack. There are benchmarks like, the number of years in practice, but that is not always a reliable indicator. The reason being that the lawyer may rest on his laurels- it’s sort of like IQ. You can have a high one but if you’re not motivated it will avail you not much. Speaking for myself, and as a defense attorney, the person has to have some familiarity with the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments and the case law which treats these constitutional provisions.

Everything starts with the bill of rights, usually placed in capital letters. These rights are fundamental and they safeguard the individual from overreaching government intrusion. The 4th amendment pertains to the federal constitution and it protects the right of the person to be secure, in their person, in their house, in their personal effects, in their papers, and in more latter day modern times, in their computers and smart phones. It does not matter that computers were not around when the Framers did their thing. The Constitution is a document that must be interpreted, and is subject to evolving standards.

The Georgia Constitution must also be consulted, particularly since more often than not it provides more protection than the federal constitution. Article I, section I, Paragraph XIII of the 1983 Georgia Constitution really rocks. It says that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue except upon probable cause supported by an oath or affirmation particularly describing the place or places to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. The law favors the obtaining of search warrants but there are several instances where a search can be done absent a search warrant. For example, if the individual consents to a search, that can pose a problem for any defense attorney who may be considering trying to have the evidence that the police found suppressed. Another condition that is problematic is if there are “exigent circumstances” and still another is if the item is in “plain view” and the police officer had the right to be where he or she was at the time they “espied” or discovered the illegal item, the contraband.

As alluded to earlier the States are free to provide stronger protections- indeed, the wording of the constitution, as between the State and the federal, may be pretty much the same, but the manner the wording is interpreted, and the scope and expansiveness of the interpretation can differ, as between the U.S. Constitution compared to the state constitution. The state courts can provide more protection and often do. But there are cases where less protection is afforded. One striking example of the “lesser protection” variation is the treatment of cell phones. For a while the highest court in Georgia was treating the cell phone like it was a container. It was applying the same law that had for decades been applied to containers that the law enforcement community intended to search. But it took the US Supreme Court to recognize that the cell phone was a little computer, and it contained an extraordinary amount of highly private and sensitive information. It took Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), and the Justices who joined in that decision, to hold that the warrantless search and seizure of the “digital contents” of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional. Note that Georgia was among those States which, up until Riley, had held that the cell phones could be searched incident to arrest.

The 5th amendment to the US Constitution provides that no person can be compelled to be a witness against him- or herself in any criminal case. The Supreme Court of the US has found that the accused’s right to be free of compelled incrimination is inextricably bound up with the right to have counsel present while one is being questioned, and the right to refuse to answer questions during an in custody interrogation ( but note that the text of the actual constitution does not provide this safeguard- it’s judicially created). This general principle has been called part of the so called Miranda rights, and its application stretches so far that it touches on DUI law in Georgia. Say you have been drinking and you get behind the wheel and the police pull you over. To make the example even juicier let’s say they pull you over when you are a mere block from your residence. There was a time not too long ago when your implied consent rights were used as a sword by the police- we are talking about pre Elliott times, ca. 2019, before the Elliott case from the Ga. Supreme Court came down, S18A1204 (decided Feb. 18, 2019).

Certain statutes in Georgia, in title 40, were ruled unconstitutional (in Elliott) to the extent that they allowed the driver’s refusal to submit to a breath test to be admitted against him or her in a criminal trial. Guess what the rationale was for holding these statutes unconstitutional? Well, the 5th amendment of the US Constitution cannot be relied upon to give the desired protection to the “refusing” motorist. Georgia’s “5th amendment analogue”, which we have in our Constitution, article I, section I, Paragraph XVI, was held by the Georgia Supreme Court, in Elliott, to provide the protection that the refusal to submit to the breath test could not be used against Miss Elliott. Miss Elliott’s DUI conviction was reversed because the refusal had been used.

Call our office today if you need criminal defense in Canton! We also serve Keithsburg, Buffington, Avery, Waleska, and holly Springs!