Locked In with Ian Bick - I’m a Criminal Defense Attorney — Here’s the Truth About the Job | Nicole Moorman

Episode Date: January 19, 2026

Nicole Moorman, a top criminal defense attorney based in Atlanta, walks through what it’s really like working inside the justice system — from defending people in serious felony and federal cases to the pressure of high-stakes trials and courtroom strategy. Born in Chicago and trained in criminal justice and law at Southern Illinois University, Troy University, and Emory University School of Law, Nicole brings a unique perspective shaped by years of legal experience and time spent as a probation officer and task force agent before becoming a lawyer. She explains how she approaches complex defenses, the ethical challenges defenders face, and why protecting the rights of the accused matters so deeply, with insights drawn from real cases and her career as one of Georgia’s most respected advocates. _____________________________________________ #CriminalDefenseAttorney #TrueCrime #JusticeSystem #LegalReality #DefenseAttorney #RealStories #YouTubePodcast #lawandcrime _____________________________________________ Thank you to FACTOR for sponsoring this episode: Head to https://factormeals.com/lockedin50off and use code lockedin50off to get 50% off your first Factor box PLUS free breakfast for 1 year. Offer only valid for new Factor customers with code and qualifying auto-renewing subscription purchase. Make healthier eating easy with Factor. _____________________________________________ Connect with Nicole Moorman: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/_kingcole_/?hl=en Website: https://moorman-law.com/ _____________________________________________ Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick: https://www.instagram.com/ian_bick/?hl=en https://ianbick.com/ Shop Locked In Merch: http://www.ianbick.com/shop _____________________________________________ Timestamps: 00:00 Intro: Cooperation, Ethics & the Reality of the Justice System 00:27 Nicole Mormon’s Childhood, Family & Early Influences 01:33 Education Path That Led to Criminal Justice 05:44 Why Nicole Chose Criminal Justice 07:01 From Chicago to Atlanta: Becoming a Probation Officer 11:10 First Cases as a Probation Officer & Reality Shock 13:37 Probation, Pretrial Supervision & System Flaws 14:40 Leaving Probation to Attend Law School 16:16 Law School Life & Interning at the DA’s Office 17:55 Inside the DA’s Office: What Prosecutors Really See 19:58 Starting Her Legal Career & Going Solo 20:35 First Trials, Stress & Emotional Pressure 22:00 Attorney-Client Relationships & Ethical Boundaries 23:38 Choosing Clients & Managing Expectations 24:43 Judges, Prosecutors & Fairness in the Courtroom 26:22 Prosecutor vs Defense Relationships Explained 27:16 State vs Federal Cases: Key Differences 28:53 Target Letters, Indictments & Bond Hearings 31:00 Trial Strategy: When to Push Forward or Slow Down 32:54 Preparing for Trial Mentally & Physically 35:23 Balancing Personal Life During High-Stress Trials 37:32 Trial Tactics, Verdicts & Jury Psychology 40:31 Jury Behavior in High-Profile Cases 42:27 Jury Selection & the Role of Consultants 43:32 Critical Trial Moments & Penalties for Going to Trial 44:53 Sentencing, Judges & the Appeals Process 47:17 Custody Status, Bond & House Arrest Explained 50:48 Biggest Client Misconceptions & Money in the System 53:00 Political Influence on Prosecutors & Charging Decisions 55:46 Diversion Programs, Plea Options & Fairness 57:00 Cooperation, Plea Deals & Informants 59:02 Plea Agreements, Testifying & Subpoenas 01:01:31 Trial Delays & Frustrations with the System 01:02:20 What Nicole Would Change About the Justice System 01:03:10 Advice to Her Younger Self 01:04:28 Life Lessons from a Legal Career 01:05:56 Final Thoughts & Closing Message Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Pool days call for cookouts and lots of laundry. This Memorial Day at Lowe's, save $80 on a Charbroil Performance Series 4-burner gas grill. Now just $199. Plus, get up to 45% off select major appliances to keep dishes, clothes, and food fresh. Having fun in the sun is easy with us in your corner. Our best lineup is here at Lowe's. VALUPS-F.27. While supplies last, selection varies by location.

See Associate at Lowe's.com for details. Crack a Cayman Jack Margarita And taste your escape It's America's number one for a reason Kaman Jack is a premium malt beverage with flavors Please drink responsibly Kaman Jack beverage company Chicago, Illinois Feels like every product claims real protein these days

But real doesn't start on a label It starts at the source Like real California milk From California farm families It's real dairy delivering high quality complete protein with all nine essential amino acids to help build muscle, give you energy, and keep you satisfied longer. So keep it real. Look for the seal. Real California milk. I usually advise against cooperation. My personal opinion is, if you made your bed, you need to lie

on it. You don't drag other people down with you. What's the scariest moment for you in a trial? I take cases that I want. I reject cases all the time. If it's a case that I can't stomach, I'm not taking it. As a criminal defense attorney, how do you feel? feel about pretrial supervision or probation? There's judges. If that's your assigned judge, I won't even take the case. There's two judges, specifically one federal and one state. I will not take the case. In this episode, you're going to hear what criminal defense really looks like from the inside. Nicole Mormon, one of Atlanta's top criminal defense attorneys, breaks down how the justice system actually works, what it means to defend people facing serious charges, and the pressure that comes

with high stakes cases. She explains trials. deals, ethics, and the realities most people never see. Nicole, welcome to Lockton. Thanks so much for Jonathan for connecting us and making the trip to Nashville today to be here. Yeah, thank you for having me. Yeah, it's a great studio, the cast collective. It is. It's really cute.

I've been filming all my episodes here this weekend, definitely coming back for more in the future. And you said this is your first time, like really spending the day in Nashville. Yeah, so I've been to Nashville for work for a few federal cases, but that's it, in and out for court. So I've never actually seen Nashville before. And right now you're based where. In Atlanta.

Did you grow up in Atlanta? I didn't. I'm from Chicago. I moved to Atlanta about 15 years ago. Okay. What was your upbringing like in Chicago? Interesting. It was very interesting.

I grew up with, I have three siblings. I have an older sister, a twin sister, and a younger brother. I'm raised by a single mom. I think high school age, I kind of bounced around between mom, grandma, friends. I would say what I thought was normal. I now know was not normal, just kind of rough. Where was your dad? He wasn't really in the picture, but now that I'm older,

I don't know that that was necessarily by choice, but it is what it is. What your mom tell you when you were a kid? As far as, well, I knew my dad. My parents were married. They divorced when I was six. They just didn't get along at all. So that made parenting, I think co-parenting very difficult between them.

What do your mom do for work? She does road construction, actually. She still does road construction. She digs up roads. Like as a construction worker? Okay. Yeah, she's a laborer in Chicago or in north suburb. So she, yeah, she builds roads.

She did that as a kid too, when you were a kid? So when I was a kid, she worked at, there was a nuclear power plant. Both of my parents worked there. And then I think she's been doing road construction for close to 25, maybe more than that. So yeah, for the most part. If there's one thing you could change about your childhood, what do you think that would be? Nothing. I wouldn't change anything.

Maybe have a closer relationship with my dad when I was younger, but other than that, I wouldn't change anything. I think everything in my childhood created who I am today, and it has built a lot of character, so I wouldn't change it. What do you think was the most important trait you carry today that your mom instilled in you as a kid? Hard work. Hard work. I'm a professional problem solver, and I think that comes from.

from having to solve a lot of problems early. And I get that from my mom. She's the same way she works her, I mean, she's in her 60s and she's still breaking roads up. But I think that is something that was instilled from both my mom and my grandmother. What was young Nicole, like 10, 11 year old Nicole before the courtrooms before, you know?

I was a wild child. I was very quiet, but kind of just did my own thing, stayed out of the way, rebellious, but not loud, rebellious. It's kind of like nobody hears me, nobody really cares when I got going on. So always really good in school. I always really enjoyed school just because it was naturally easy. But I kind of marched to the beat of my own drone forever. What was your plan for the future as a kid? What were you thinking? I didn't have one. So you know, the first thing people usually ask is, did you always want to be a lawyer? Never thought about it. Never in my life. Even in college,

didn't think about it. Didn't think about going to college. It kind of just went with the flow and ended up here. And you graduated high school in Chicago? Mm-hmm. Well, I graduated in high school in North Suburbs, so Zion. And then I went to, after that, I went to Southern Illinois. But even in that, I didn't decide to go to college until two weeks before it started.

I'm like, well, shit, all my friends are going to school. What am I about to do? Because I was living with a friend at the time. And she was going to school. So it was like, well, maybe you should go to school. So that's how I ended up in college. Was your mom, someone that instilled going to school as a priority? No, she didn't go to college.

My father didn't go to college. I don't know that it was ever even discussed in my household. So where do you think you got that knack for wanting to do well in school from? Because it was easy. For me, it was easy. I don't recall ever having to study in high school or college. Law school obviously was different, but it was just easy for me. So it was kind of like instead of being shown,

like, like, role models. Like, I want to be like them. I was showed what I didn't want to be. So I knew what I didn't want. And that's kind of how I ended up going to school. Like, well, I don't want to be stuck here. I don't want to be pregnant. Everyone was having kids at that time straight out of school.

Sorry, Mom. But I don't want to do road construction. So it was kind of like, well, let me really go to school to buy some time so I can figure it out. What major did you select if you select the one at all? Criminal justice. Oh. Because I knew that I had to do something that interested me. Otherwise, I wouldn't do well.

I can't focus and pay attention if I'm not interested. And criminal justice just seemed like it would, I know a lot of people that were intertwined in the criminal justice system growing up, and I just felt like that would be something really interesting to learn about. So again, to me, it would have been easy. So I'm like, well, let me just do that. I think that would be fun. What do you think you knew at the time about the criminal justice system?

Nothing. Literally nothing. So it's like selecting a box of, hey, I'm going to go into a criminal justice. Well, I mean, I knew obviously the pipeline, right, from school to jail, I knew a lot of people that went to jail and they were incarcerated. I knew I had never been inside a courtroom except for traffic, so I didn't know too much about that. But I always found it really interesting.

And I know now that I knew nothing then. I thought I knew what the criminal justice system was, but I didn't know shit. So you're a speeder back in your day, Nicole? Mm-hmm. Super speeder. Super speeder. Matter of fact, Murphy's Borough, Tennessee

tried to throw me in jail for super speeding. I was like, wait, whoa. I was just speeding. But, yeah, I had that issue bad. So when do you transfer to law school? There's a whole, because I took a break. I didn't go straight to law school. So there was a whole,

I lived a whole life between undergrad and law school. So I graduate or undergrad at SIU in 2010. I go back to Chicago for, that was May. I go back for a few months and it just, I was like, there's nobody here that I'm really friends with. The friends that are here, they're not really up to anything or they have kids.

I don't want kids. And I didn't really have anywhere to go. I was living in my grandma's basement. I was working at a facility for people with brain injuries. I had one friend in Atlanta and I was like, maybe I'll just go to Atlanta. I don't really like the cold.

So I think I'll go to Atlanta. So I started applying to jobs. and I got a job in Atlanta as a felony probation officer. You were a probation officer? Yeah. So that's where it started. Wow. I know.

People were like, well, you were the police? Yeah. So that's what got me to Atlanta. And I was an officer in Atlanta. I was kind of in the country and I worked for a really great office. And I enjoyed it, actually. I really enjoyed being a probation officer. But after some time there, I want to be brutally honest about how I ended up in law school,

I was in court and I was in court and I was in court. And I remember back then we used to have to make recommendations if we were violating a probationer. And I recommended that that specific probationer be adjudicated guilty because he was the first offender. And I remember the public defender coming up to me asking me if that was my recommendation. And I said yes. And she was like, well, you said adjudicate guilty. And I said yes. And she was like, what does that mean?

And I was like, what do you mean? You're the lawyer. So that kind of piqued my interest. and I started digging into my case load. And I'm like, a lot of you probably wouldn't be on probation if somebody actually fought for you. So then I was like, well, she can do it, I can do it. I think I'll go to law school next.

And I asked my boss at the time what he thought. And he said, no. He's like, no, you can't do it. I went to law school. It's hard because I was trying to. I had a kid. So we missed that whole section, but I had a kid at the time. And he's like, no, you can't do it.

It's too hard. So then I waited at the, another four months, and I was like, I think I just quit, you know, to law school full time. So that's how I ended up in law school. How old are you when you became a probation officer? 22. Was it challenging at that age, say, facing down, say someone that was a 40 or 50-year-old getting out of prison after 15 or 20 years, and, you know, you're giving them strict rules of how

to live his life after? So I'm going to say no. And part of that is because the office that I worked for, I worked for office that a great office, like my coworkers, my supervisor at the time, which is a different supervisor that told me I couldn't go to law school. Everyone was really into like helping these people that are on probation succeed. It was like, what do you need? How can we help you? It wasn't the typical probation that you hear about. Lock everybody up. So I think that was the big difference. It made my job really easy because the people that I was supervising didn't hate me. And they didn't

hate me because my boss taught me how to do my job how it was supposed to be done. So I didn't I didn't find it challenging at all. I actually enjoyed it, but it was also like a glorified babysitter at some point. So it was like, hmm. Do you remember your first case? No. Was there a case that stuck out to you at all? Yeah, matter of fact, I remember my first case.

It wasn't my case, but I remember being in court for it. And coming from Chicago, it was like, whoa. We were in court and there was a case. where the guy let his friend live with him and his wife. He had some hard times. And he came home from work at lunchtime or something, and his friend was sleeping with his wife, and he runs in, he catches them, he grabs the bat and says,

I'm going to F him kill you. He drops the bat, runs outside and, like, cries or something. And the friend calls the police, and the guy's arrested for terroristic threats. And he comes to court, and he pleads guilty to terroristic threats, and they throw him in prison. didn't touch them. It was just the threats.

And I couldn't believe it. I'm like, wait, did I just hear that? And because I wasn't in Atlanta, I was out in another county, and I was like, where the fuck did I just move to? I couldn't believe it. So that was like shell-shocked that while the South is a lot different. But that was like my big... When you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work,

use Indeed-sponsor jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen. and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications, and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this show will get a $75-sponsored job credit at Indeed.com slash podcast. That's Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed sponsored jobs. Whatever your thing, it could be anything.

Canva helps you make that thing a thing. Canva is a simple online tool thing. It's a way to design with our magic AI tool things. You can social media your thing, generate images or videos of your thing, make decks for presentations to show your thing. Whatever needs to be done for your thing, Canva can make it an even better and bigger thing. Canva, the thing that makes anything a thing.

All. Pay off your home, travel for life, drive a Ferrari. In celebration of the world premiere of the Monopoly Big Board Buckslot Machine by Aristocrat Gaming, Yamava Resort and Casino at San Manuel is giving one person a $1.6 million dream package. The biggest prize in Yamava's history. Club Serrano members can earn daily instant prizes and secure a spot in the finale May 29th. Don't pass go and own it all. Only at Yamava, celebrating its 40th anniversary. You win? Details at yamava.com must be 21-20. Please gamble responsibly. Monopoly is a trademark of Hasbro. Hasbro is not a sponsor of this promotion.

Whoa. Do you look at probation differently now that you're a criminal defense attorney? 100%. And I'll tell you, One thing I did not do when I was a probation officer, if attorneys called me or if I got letters from attorneys, which wasn't often because I was out in the country, I never called them back. And now I, that actually haunts me that I would never, you can talk to me in court, maybe, but they were so strict about recommendations that there was really no budging. That has completely changed.

Obviously not that I'm an attorney, but like I said, that haunts me still. Like I can't believe that I was doing that when attorneys were trying to do that. do their job. Do you think that probation officers are actually impartial like they're supposed to be? No. No, absolutely not. Some, I think some are, I think there are some really, really great probation officers that don't have like this power trip and they actually try to help you and assist you and guide you. But there absolutely are some that are just completely not impartial and it's third way of the highway and it's completely unfair. Do you see a difference as a criminal defense attorney between federal probation and state probation?

100%. Yeah, 100%. I think federal probation is just the offices alone. They're more professional. I think from my experience, at least, they're more reasonable. I think they're more understanding. And like I said, that's not everybody,

but just in my experience with both the state and the federal system, federal probation seems to be a little bit easier in the sense of it's easier to talk and get in touch with your officer, but also I think your expectations are also actually relayed to you, but more difficult in the sense of they expect more. I think state probation kind of slacks. I think they're, I mean, especially in the city, there's too much on their plate. As a criminal defense attorney, how do you feel about pretrial supervision or probation in state

or federal cases? I think it's unfair. Like, I get it. I'd rather be on pretrial than being in custody, but I think in a lot of situations, it's unfair. Essentially, you're being punished before you're convicted, and I think it's unfair. So does that go back to a lot of people saying in today's world that there's no such thing as innocent until proven guilty? 100%. Because if you're deemed innocent at this point,

why am I on ankle monitor pending trial? Or why am I having to report every month? And I haven't been convicted yet. I think it's unfair. Is there some cases where you think that it is necessary when it's kind of clear that maybe that person did it? think there's always that piece of doubt where it could have been someone else? I think in some cases it makes sense.

And I don't even think it's necessarily that they did it. I think if we're weighing whether or not they're a flight risk or there's a victim in the case and we want to ensure the victim's safety, then yeah, it might make sense, but I think that is overused. Tell us about your transition to law school from the probation office once you quit. It was tough. So I will say Between

I graduated undergrad in 2010 I didn't go to law school until 2014 In between then I ended up pregnant And I had a kid in 2012 And when I decided that I wanted to go to law school I just had a newborn so it wasn't going to happen

So I got my master's in between the two Just to kind of get back in the swing of things And I think that did make it a little bit easier But when I quit my job and went back to, or went back to school, went to law school. My son was two. My son was with me very often at school. I didn't have money to put him in daycare. I was a single mom. Um, his dad and I split shortly after law school, maybe a couple months in the law school. So the transition was difficult because not only did I have a two-year-old to raise by myself, I didn't have family

in Atlanta, so I didn't have help. I didn't have friends in Atlanta at the time. Um, I have to raise a two-year-old, I have to go to school, and law school's tough, but I also have to work because I have to be able to provide and pay my bills. So the transition was definitely difficult and took some adjusting, but it worked out. What were you doing for work during that period? I worked at a law firm. So I worked at a criminal defense firm during that period, part-time. And then at some point, the firm actually made me go intern at the DA's office. And my boss's reasoning was, you cannot successfully defend a case if you don't know how

they prosecute a case. And I went literally kicking and screaming like, I'm not prosecuting. I don't want to go. And anybody that works for me, if I catch them early enough, you're going to the DA's office. It was invaluable experience. What do you think was the most valuable piece of information you took from that experience?

I think really the thought process behind charging a case and actually how the whoever's charging the actual case, how it's completely up to them. They go through, despite whatever the police give them, they go through the evidence themselves and they charge it. They can change the charges. They can add charges. They can decide to dismiss it.

So I think knowing that has really helped my practice a lot, knowing that the ADA that is charging has that authority. How long does it take you to complete law school? three years. Okay. And you did the interning at the DA's office the whole three years or just a portion of it? It was a portion of it. I think it was maybe a year, a year and a half. Must have been pretty miserable. It wasn't that. It was just a lot of my plate. In turn, you're not getting paid. I already don't want to prosecute. The prosecutor that I was interning for was also running at that time to be a judge. So he wasn't really there. So yeah, there was a lot going down.

But I actually enjoyed it. The people that trained me and that I worked with were great. They're still prosecutors aside from the one judge. They're great prosecutors. The judge that I was in front of that I was assigned to at the time, she's since retired. She was a great judge. I liked her.

So it wasn't miserable. It was just I got to move on from this. Yeah. So what happens after law school? Do you go and work for a firm or do you start your own right off the get? No, I stayed at the firm I was at. I stayed there. So I graduated law school at 18.

I stay at that firm until COVID. And when COVID happens, the firm splits. There's two partners. And one partner does at the time, mostly traffic and misdemeanors. And one partner does federal and felonies. And I worked under federal and felonies. So they split. And then it was kind of like, you can stay, but we're going to have to reduce your pay

and we're going to have to take away your benefits just because everything is kind of unknown right now with the firm splitting and with COVID. So I did stay for a little while, and then it just got tough. I had an eight-year-old at the time. There's no school. There's no daycare. My boss at the time, we didn't necessarily see eye to eye. And it just became too much.

So because I had a kid, I felt like I needed the security. But when I actually looked at it, like the security was almost nothing. So it was like, now is a good time. But it was also during COVID when I went so. So it was like, where do I get clients from? I get clients from court. So with there being no court, I didn't really, I was very unsure. But I also know myself well enough to know it'll be okay.

And if it's not, I can always get a job in another firm. It's not that big of a deal. So I end up going solo in, I actually just celebrated five years. So it was August of 2020. Congratulations. Thank you. Best decision I've ever made in my life. What was your first trial like out of law school?

Scary. Trials are still scary. Like they're scary. You're dealing with someone's life. Their life, they're literally trusting you with their life. So first trial was a murder trial. Second shared a murder trial. One, they did get acquitted.

It was a sad case. He should never have been charged. And I think that should have been obvious. It is what it is. I'll be honest, eating healthy sounds great until you realize it requires time you don't actually have. Shopping, cooking, cleaning. That's three extra hours I don't have most nights.

Factor fixes that. No meal prep, no recipes, no stress. Two minutes, real food, done. I hit a point where I knew I wasn't failing at eating better. I was failing at having the time and energy to make it happen consistently. Factor meals are already made by chefs, designed by dieticians and delivered straight to your door. You heat it up, you eat, and you move on with your day. What's inside matters to me, lean proteins, colorful vegetables, whole food ingredients,

and healthy fats, no refined sugars, no artificial sweeteners, and no refined seed oils. One meal I keep coming back to is the Smoky Gouda chicken, it's flavorful, filling, and actually feels like a proper meal, especially on days where everything else is nonstop. Factor also doesn't try to force you into one plan. They've got over 100 rotating meals every week, high protein, calorie smart, Mediterranean, GLP1 support, ready to eat salads, plus their new muscle pro collection for strength and recovery. You just pick what fits your goals and your schedule. Everything is always fresh, never frozen, ready in two minutes with no prep, no cleanup, and no mental load. It's not about motivation, it's about removing the excuse. I use this and

You should too. So head to factormeals.com slash locked in 50 off and use code locked in 50 off to get 50% off your first factor box plus free breakfast for one year. Offer only valid for new factor customers with code and qualifying auto renewing subscription purchase. Make healthier eating easy with factor. Is it hard to keep emotions out of it, especially when you're a case like that, say a murder case or looking at the evidence?

Yes and no. As far as the actual case, no, and I will say because I have my own firm, I take cases that I want. I reject cases all the time. If it's a case that I can't stomach, I'm not taking it. I don't take crimes against women or children. Now there's exceptions. We have extortion. We have people that I know that's been accused of some pretty nasty things that I just know wasn't true.

Then, yeah, we'll dig into it. But I think keeping emotions out of it is a lot easier when I'm taking the cases that I want. Where the emotions come in is when you build a bond with the client and they become like family and the outcome isn't looking great. Or I'm actually representing family and they're screwed. Then it becomes a little bit more difficult. Is it hard to keep that professional versus friendship type relationship divided with a client? Because I know with my attorney, you become friends.

Yeah. You're with that person even during a trial for hours and hours and hours. Well, I think a lot of times what I have found, and it may be because I'm a woman, I don't know, but a lot of time you kind of become a therapist. And because you become like a therapist to a lot of my clients, it's like I have clients that have just come to my office because they need peace and they need to convent. And it has nothing to do with the case. So, yeah, I think it does become like that. Like it's like, hey, we can't actually hang out because we have an attorney-client relationship. But that gets tough also.

Aside from those cases you won't take, are there other characteristics or attributes you're looking at that will decide whether you take the case or not? Yes. Sometimes when I do like a consultation and we just know if they're bad, you're going to be way too difficult to deal with, I won't take it. And the reason is the cases that I do take are usually federal or high aggravated felonies. So that means that the case is already going to be difficult to deal with. my job as a whole is stressful. You're not about to be adding extra stress. Now, I understand that a lot of people are, you know, you can't help you're in trouble.

You're facing some pretty significant punishments, but, and that's fine. I can take that all day. But if we just don't get along or butt heads, I'm not doing it. I will refund you every penny you have given me. I have fired myself many times if it just gets to that point. But also, if you don't have a good relationship with your attorney, how can you, you trust them to really fight for your life. I wouldn't have much confidence.

And I understand that. So because of that, I'll get rid of a case if I have to. When someone brings you a case, do you know off the bat what the outcome will be? Like in your head, I know you won't tell the client, but do you have a belief? Sometimes. Sometimes. Not necessarily when they first bring the case, but I can look at the prosecutor, the judge, the indictment, and the discovery, obviously. and yeah, I could eight times out of ten

tell you what's about to happen. Do you think what judge the case gets assigned to makes a difference in the outcome? 100%. There's judges, if that's your assigned judge, I won't even take the case. There's two judges, specifically, one federal and one state,

I will not take the case. But the judge makes a huge outcome. That's ultimately, if you're found guilty or if you plead, that's who's sentencing you. So that's, yeah, that's huge. Isn't that a very unfair system then? 100%. It's very unfair.

But the same with the prosecutor. The prosecution has, I mean, that's who you really want to be friends with. They have a lot of decision-making authority, especially when it comes to prosecuting the cases and what charges. So the same. You get a prosecutor that's just like talking to a brick wall. It's unfair. Now, a lot of prosecutors and defense attorneys are friendly with each other.

Yeah, 100%. I was just talking about this the other day. I get a lot of calls from people that, hey, I have an attorney, but I saw them laughing and hanging out with the prosecutor. I don't trust them. I want to hire you. And I'm like, that's actually really, in my opinion, that's a good sign. I think I get more done by being kind and friendly and actually being able to and having the ability to have a conversation with the prosecutor than having to fight it out in court. Now, just like some defense attorneys can get really attached to emotionally to the case, do you think prosecutors are getting a moment?

emotionally attached to their case and that might, you know, make it difficult. Sometimes. Yeah. I mean, I would imagine how I look at it as some people look at it as I'm a defense attorney. So the prosecutors, no matter what, that's it's wartime. That's my enemy. I don't look at it like that. I look at it as a defense attorney.

That's my job. I have a job to do. That's their job. They have a job to do as well. It's when they just take it way too far. or have the inability to reason or actually look at it from different perspectives that it becomes a problem and it becomes a war. But I would imagine that they, you know, because they're protecting the community or society,

yeah, I would assume they would get attached emotionally to some of their cases. Now, you were mentioning federal and state cases that you handle sometimes the state. Is it hard to navigate the rules, procedures, how the courts operate, switching between the two? I think it's more difficult to maneuver different jurisdictions in the state, right? How each different county runs rather than state to federal. Federal is pretty much the same, no matter which federal jurisdiction. State, depending on the county, is completely different. Now, when a client comes to you and are they normally already indicted or are you working

with them behind the scenes before the indictment when they're just, they get the target letter, for instance? Both. I get them both. State, I mean, state and federal. I get a lot that, hey, I think I might have charges, or, hey, I do have charges. I need to turn myself in. Or you got a target letter. Or I get them, I've already been convicted. I need you for sentencing. And I'll take that as well if it's something I'm interested in. Most of the time when someone gets a target letter, are they normally getting indicted or charged? Or are there cases where nothing ever comes of it? because you were able to successfully defend it behind the scenes? So I would say if you get a target letter and nothing ever comes of it, it's never a target

letter and then it disappears. If you have a target letter and then it doesn't result in an indictment or a prosecution, it's probably because we stepped in or you hired an attorney and we got a resolve prior to. And can you explain what a target letter is? So a target letter is basically a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office saying, hey, you are the target of an investigation and we are giving you an opportunity to either jump in front of it, whether that be, it doesn't mean cooperation, but it could mean cooperation, whether you want to cooperate, whether you want to waive indictment and move forward on the information, or whether

you just want to get an attorney before this goes any further. But it's basically a warning, and it's usually given to people kind of lower end on the totem pole to the larger investigation. What's the number one mistake you see people make when they receive a target letter? Throw it away. Not take it serious. Think that it's because it's just a letter that it's meaningless, they're not charged yet, or not contacting an attorney for sure. That would be the first thing I would do.

Call an attorney and ask what the hell is a target letter. And once they do actually get indicted and the bond hearing comes along, there's a big difference between bond and federal court and state court, right? Can you explain that difference? So state courts specifically in Georgia, the AILA factors, which are four factors the court is asked to consider to determine whether or not bond is reasonable. And the facts of the case do not play a part in that at all. In the feds, pursuant to the Bell Reform Act, the one is a detention hearing and a motion for detention has to be filed by the government for one to detain. And then when you have the bond hearing, the facts of the case.

and the weight of the evidence against the party is considered. So that's, to me, that's the big difference between the two. And you're not actually paying money in federal court? What do you mean? Do you have to pay money to get released? Well, sometimes. For the most part, I think off the top of my head, I've only had two that actually physically had to pay money, but it's 10%.

So you get a $10,000 bond, you pay $1,000 to the clerk's office. But for the most part, no. You, it's a signature bond. It's an unsecured bond for $100,000. And if you don't come to court, then you owe it, but you don't actually pay any money, which depending on the state, you can get a signature bond in the state, too, but not for charges that are anywhere near serious. Now, do you believe defendants should rush to have their trial right away,

or should they extend it, prolong it, and fight it out as long as possible and delay it? I think it depends. it depends on for me what are the charges what do we know that's kind of the biggest thing what do we know about the case is this a case that we want to file a speedy and hurry up and rush it sometimes um i have to file a speedy when i leave here but it's because we know my client's innocent let's hurry even take this to try and get it done over with because otherwise you're going to sit on an anchor monitor you're going to sit on pretrial and have to report it's going to sit on your criminal history and it's going to bar you from getting jobs

sometimes it's hey no we need to drag this out we need to conduct our own investigations we need to conduct our own interviews we need to get every piece of evidence we can from the government it just depends this is a Bose moment your 10 boring blocks from home until the beat drops in Bose clarity and the baseline transforms boring into maybe the best part of your day your life deserves music your music deserves Bose find your perfect product at Bose.com Enjoy more ways to save at Ralph's, like low prices in every aisle. And when you download the Ralph's app, you can clip and save more with digital coupons every week. Plus, you can earn fuel points to save up to $1 per gallon at the pump. At Ralph's, you can enjoy more ways to save and more rewards every time you shop. So it's always easy to save big every day with savings and rewards. Ralph's SoCal for over 150 years.

Savings may vary by state. Fuel restrictions apply. See site for details. This episode is brought to you by Subaru. Go further in a long-range Subaru hybrid with up to 581 miles per tank in the Forrester hybrid. Longer range, better fuel efficiency. And legendary symmetrical all-wheel drive, standard. The Subaru Forrester Hybrid.

Visit Subaru.com slash hybrid to learn more. Maximum range based on EPA estimated combined fuel economy and a full tank of fuel. Actual mileage and range may vary. It depends on what's going on in the case. How often do you see the government actually ready for trial by the time they indict? Do you think they rush it in some cases? Never. Never.

They're never ready for trial. So wouldn't it benefit the defendant to do a speedy trial? Well, it depends, maybe, because they'll get ready before trial most of the time. So it just depends what type of case it is and what do we know about it? The state being ready before indictment, I don't think I've ever seen that. They'll issue, especially if we're talking about state and not federal. federal maybe I haven't seen it but maybe state they're not they charge it and then figure it out after for the most part when I look back on my case I saw that the longer we delayed it the more there's something else that comes up or another piece of evidence or more time for them to dig into it

whereas I feel like if we went to trial a lot faster it could have been a different outcome well it depends because I've seen that as well but I've seen the reverse also I've seen or have been able to use the argument if we know we're going to have to plead guilty at some point. We cannot try this case. Then we drag it out four years. Now I have four years of good behavior to work with to show the judge how he can be productive. He's been productive for four years. He doesn't need to go to prison. And that has worked very favorably in the past. It kind of just depends. How do you know when to try a case versus plead out? So either, I mean, if we go through discovery and we think that we can win or have a good chance at winning based on the evidence, then we try it. Or if the offer or the judge, we know the judge is going to hang them,

the offer is so bad, then sometimes we're like, well, try it. You're going to get hung either way, so let's try it. And we've been victorious doing that. So it just is the evidence. Will you only go to trial if you and your client are on the same page? Yeah, 100%. Well, I'm not going to say 100%.

Ultimately, by the time we get to trial, yes, we need to be on the same page. Sometimes it takes convincing, right? So sometimes they're like, I don't want to go to trial. Because trial is scary. You have 12 strangers judging whether or not you should go to prison. That is terrifying. So sometimes it does take some convincing. But sometimes it's the reverse.

Sometimes it's like they want to go to trial so bad. And I'm like, you have lost your mind. And this is why. So, yeah. How do you prepare mentally for a trial? We know the physical work that goes into it, but the mental aspect, you know, that first day. and especially with a high profile case, you're in the news, people are slandering you for representing someone

that's been accused of something serious. You just go for it. The slander media, that's kind of like, we don't even see it. I mean, I don't see it. I could care less about that. But again, a lot of that goes into, I don't take the cases that I can't stomach. But mentally preparing for trial,

I think it's more about mentally, you're not about to, sleep because there's never a day you're in trial that you go home and go to sleep after you're preparing for the next day what happened the first day how are we going to rebut this um so more so for me it's mentally preparing okay this is what we have to do this is the schedules that we have to align i'm a single mom so i got to make sure he's fine and taking care of um so for me it's more so that the outside in the media i could care less yeah how do you balance personal life from work life during a trial I'm very lucky that my son is very self-sufficient. He's 14 now, so it's a lot easier. But also, I have a support system. I can call family members. Now I have a community in Atlanta now that I can make calls, hey, he needs to get to practice. Hey, somebody pick him up. Hey, order Uber Eats tonight. It's going to be a late night. So it's a lot easier now that he's older. Do you find that your physical or mental health lacks during a trial?

By the end, yeah, for sure. Physically, you're going, going, going. And even when you try to not go, you're mentally going, going, going, because your brain doesn't happen. For me, my brain doesn't have the ability to turn off. If I'm in trial, when I try to go to sleep, all I'm thinking about is the next day. Who are they going to call?

What order? What am I going to ask? What do I need to come out of each witness? So it's taxing for sure, especially the type of cases that my firm takes that actually go to trial are usually high aggravated cases. So it's not like five-hour trials. You're going to be in trial for a significant amount of time. So it gets tough. When you're in the heat of a trial, how hard is it to not think about your other cases that are

going on actively? I don't. And I think I wish more clients understood that if I'm in trial for you, I don't think you want me stepping away from that trial to now if there's a fire that has to be put out, that's different, but you don't want me in my attention and focus being over here while you're fighting for your life here. It's unfair. So, unless it's urgent, everything else gets put on complete pause during trial time. Do you feel like some of your other clients take that personally? Like, even the ones that are sitting in jail?

Oh, 100%. 100%. The last trial I had, it was an uphill battle because it's like, I don't have the ability to call you back. I don't have the ability to meet with you because you're in trial. and you're in trial all day, right? You get a lunch break. So their understanding is, well, don't you get a break?

You can't. I'm like, I have a break and I have to go interview a witness that just got sprung on me. Like, I'm not taking calls the entire day. So, yeah, they take it personal a lot. What do you think is the dirtiest or nastiest trick prosecutors play during trials? I don't know. It just depends on the prosecutor. But that goes into knowing your prosecutor, too.

Like, a lot of times we have relationships with these prosecutors. We have at least dealt with them before, so we know exactly what they're going to try to pull. The sneak witnesses, we love those. Oh, we couldn't find them until 10 minutes ago. So stuff like that, but it just depends on the prosecutor. What's the scariest moment for you in a trial? Verdict. 100% verdict.

As far as a trial, once you get going, so you start a trial, you have jury selection. Jury selection is extremely important, but it's not. nerve-wracking at all to me. When you first stand up and you start your opening sentence, I think probably that moment before you start, that's pretty nerve-wrecking. But once you get going, you're going. For me, I'm going. But waiting on a verdict, not necessarily the wait, but when they say we have a verdict and you come back and sit down and wait for the verdict, that's scary. Do you know when they come out what it's going to be? I've talked to some attorneys who say they could tell by body motion or body language.

Yeah, most of the time, because we watch the jurors. We watch them the entire jury. I've sat on trial when that was literally my job, watch the jury, make notes of the jury. And you, especially along a trial, you get to know your jurors and you're watching the headnods or you're watching the ugly faces and you're watching. So you get a sense of what's annoying them. don't they like what they don't believe? And you use that for your closing. So a lot of times when you send them back, we can pinpoint who's going to be for us,

who's going to be against us, and whether or not they're going to be able to flip them. So yeah, I would say, yeah. Do you ever talk to the jurors after, whether it was a winner or a loss to kind of see? Absolutely. What do you find in those conversations? I enjoy them because they don't always talk about the case. They talk about you as an attorney. So they give great feedback.

But I think it helps. I would never not want to talk to the jurors. I mean, sometimes you're not allowed to, right? Or sometimes they have to be willing to talk to you too. But if we have an opportunity to go in the jury room afterwards and kind of get their feedback, especially my last trial was a hung jury in some of the counts. And I want to know why. What weren't they buying?

What were they buying? And it was important to me because if I have to retry this, now I know what the issues were. So. Now you represent some high profile cases. do you think that makes it harder with a juror? I don't know. I wouldn't say harder. Not necessarily.

So do you think it's possible to find unbiased juries that don't actually know the person, like people that aren't on social media or have no ties to it at all emotionally? With social media out there, no, I don't think so. You're going to have at least somebody in the jury. Either somebody in the jury that has seen it, especially if it's a high profile.

It doesn't even have to be high profile, but if it's made the news, if it's something that happened in their community, They're going to know about it, right? And if not, once you hear all the juicy stuff in the indictment, people are going to go research. They're going to pull up what they see in the news. I don't think, I don't think everyone does that, but I think it's rare that you would have a jury of 12 that nobody knows anything. So do you think that there needs to be sequestered juries in these higher profile cases?

Well, how would you sequester a jury? It would be hard to do, but... Yeah. No, not necessarily. I just think jury selection is super... important. I think as the attorney, you need to be able to read the jurors. Did you watch the Diddy documentary? No. It was interesting because they had a juror in there who was said, yeah, you know, I liked his music and I saw the tape of him hitting Cassie in the

hotel, but the case wasn't about that. So it was cool to see or interesting to see how that juror was able to keep it completely separate. Yeah, that is, that's that's super interesting. And I will say, I don't watch TV. That's the only reason I haven't watched it, but I heard it was good. Being able to separate, and they kept him on the jury? Yeah, he was one of the ones that voted to convict and not convict on the more serious charges. Oh, okay.

Yeah, he was in the documentary afterwards. Oh, okay, okay. Yeah, I mean, jury selection is one of the most important parts of trial. And we're taught to deselect and not actually select. but I mean jury selection is going to make or break your case. Do you believe in jury consultants and the art behind that? I do, actually. I do. I have seen it. One, be successful. But also, I think it prepares everybody, right?

Because you're getting feedback from people that are in the community, even though they're not real. But if you're talking about like when they're bringing like a fake jury and you present your case, I think it would help. if nothing else, it'll shake your nerves a little bit, right? Because you're already putting the case up and you're getting the feedback. What do you think is the most pivotal moment in a trial that leads the jury to either convict or not convict? Well, I think, in my opinion, there's two places. And that would be when the defense gets to present their case, if there's a case to present, sometimes there isn't. Sometimes it's just, hey, whether or not they prove their case, but it's closing.

Closing is a deal breaker. But it makes it break the case. to me tying everything back together do you think clients are actually penalized by going to trial 100 percent 100 percent um in fact that's always the biggest question this is what the offer is this is what the judge will probably do if we go to trial and lose what kind of sentence are they looking at it's it's hardly ever the same and that's federal or state it's not supposed to be that way though correct well it's not and i think federally obviously you lose the three points right you lose the three points worth of acceptance if you go to trial. So even if the judge does nothing more than that,

you still lose those three points, which is unfair. But what I have found in the state is it's way different. And no, it shouldn't be like that. I think you should be able to exercise your right to a trial if that's what you want to do. Do you think that'll ever change? I don't. Unfortunately, I don't. And I hate it. I think it's unfair. And I think a lot more people are pressured into taking pleas with the fear of that, even if they are completely innocent. They will get a great plea deal or a great plea offer and they'll take it because they don't want to get hit with the penalty of going to trial and actually exercising their rights and should the trial or should the jury convict them now they're going to prison when that wasn't even on the table. It's bullshit. Excuse my language.

In a case say that you do lose and sentencing does happen. Do you feel like the judge has already made his decision before sentencing death? Yes. Well, because the judge has heard the whole case. I think it's unrealistic to believe that the judge has not created it, informed an opinion of this person based on the case. So I do think, you know, obviously as an attorney, we'll still put up every piece of mitigation we possibly can, but are their minds made up at that point? I think so. Do you know which way a judge is leaning in the sentence?

Based on observing the judge or just knowing the judge. Well, a little bit of both, or the case and the guidelines. I mean, I know my judges, right? So if it's a judge that I don't know, I ask about them. Hey, what's going to happen if we go to trial and lose? What is this judge going to do? How are they on sentencing? What type of mitigation do they like to hear?

Once you practice enough in front of these specific judges, you know what they want to hear. You know what they like to hear. So, yeah, I can usually tell my client before ahead of sentencing what's going to happen. And it might not be as significant as, hey, this is a sentence we're going to get because I usually never know that. but I can say, hey, this judge will probably vary down a little bit based on whatever mitigation or, hey, this judge is not going to do us any favors, doesn't care, doesn't want to hear it, that I typically will know beforehand. How difficult is it to deal with newly appointed judges?

I think it just, I mean, it depends. We have a few newer judges. So I practice predominantly in Atlanta. I practice in a lot of jurisdictions across the country federally, but I'm obviously more often the Atlanta federal courts. And we have we have some new appointees and I like them. I think not necessarily are specifically Atlanta judges, but I think the problem is some judges that are appointed when they take the bench, they tend to not have a backbone, right, because they're scared. They don't want people to judge them or they don't want to be considered the lenient judge or not tough

enough. So I think, you know, that's always an issue to worry about not our Atlanta judges necessarily. I'm just saying typically I think that's for us defense attorneys. That's the worry across the board. They're going to come in. They're brand new. They are, you know, going to lack a backbone and want to, you know, be very strict guidelines. This is what it is. Do you believe in judges having lifelong appointment? Yeah, appointments. No. I mean, you look at some cases where I've been reading in New York, there's 94-year-old judges taking on cases. Well, I think the problem with that is times have changed, right? Times changed.

The laws continually changed. The guidelines aren't mandatory anymore. And when you have a judge that's been on the bench for 40 years, I feel like they might see a brick of coke and have a heart attack, like, what? Where that's like a really small amount now. So I think the problem with that is, one, they don't always adjust to the change as well. And then I also think that with a lifetime appointment, there was no trial period. And you might get a really awful judge and they're just here forever.

So I don't agree with that. I think they should have to either be voted in at some point, like after a term, or they're appointed by the president, right, the federal judges, or they would have to be re-evaluated and reappointed after a certain term. Do you believe in the appeal process or do you find in most cases it's unsuccessful? after a trial? I'm not going to say I don't believe in it. I think it is a avenue, A avenue. I don't know if it's a good avenue.

I think it's tough, though. It's tough. It's lengthy. People think, hey, I got wrongfully convicted. I'm going to appeal and be out in 30 days. No, you're not. It takes years to appeal. So it's not necessarily that I don't believe in it.

Appeals are hard. They're really hard. I think there could or should at some point be some type of wiggle room. I know for us in Atlanta, we have a conviction integrity unit now. I think everyone should have a conviction integrity unit. And it's an avenue where maybe the appellate process doesn't work here. But it's putting in a new set of eyes on us to look at cases where there are wrongful convictions. But that should be mandatory in every office, I think.

Would you rather have a client that's in prison awaiting trial or out on the streets? On the streets. 100% on the streets. The only time, so I never want anybody in custody. I never want to prepare for a trial while my client's in custody because it's tough. A lot of facilities I have to visit through glass. We have to schedule visits. My schedule fluctuates every day.

So it's very difficult. And then once I get there to visit you, we're on a time constraint. It sucks. But also what sucks is when you get somebody out on bond that ultimately is going to have to go due time and you have spent three years out of custody and when the time comes and that's usually a plea and you're going to have to plead guilty and go and do time, it's like, damn, if you wouldn't have gotten a bond, this time would have been done already and you'd have been back home. So it kind of sucks then, but I still rather fight it from the outside 100%.

Do you think house or us should be counted towards the sentence? Yeah, 100%. 100%. I think not only should house arrest the home detention, I think ankle monitor, any means of limitation should be counted, even if say you're on ankle monitor, but you have free movement. So they argue that shouldn't be considered custody time because you still had freedom. Well, maybe a half a day for every day that you spent something because it's unfair. You've been punished and penalized for something that you weren't even convicted of this entire time.

Then none of it counts. I think this is crazy. Why do you think they don't do that? I think it would just, I don't know. I wish they would. Some judges actually will consider it, and obviously BOP doesn't consider it, so it would have to be written into a sentence,

or they'll reduce a sentence by that time. But I think it should be mandatory, and I don't know why they actually don't do it, but it makes no sense to be. How frustrating is it as an attorney when your client does have bail, and they either catch another case during it or they get into some trouble that they're not supposed to be in?

It's frustrating. It's frustrating. And what I think clients don't understand is when I fight to get you a bond, especially in a case that you maybe shouldn't have gotten a bond or maybe don't necessarily qualify for a bond. And then you violate the bond by getting another charge. I now lose credibility with the judge. So for me going back before that judge and asking to have you released again,

the judge is kind of looking at me like, well, you see what happened last time? And it kind of puts us in a sticky situation. So it's very frustrating. And it's like almost as though you're not taking your case serious. And if you don't take it serious, how can you expect anybody else to care about it? What do you think are the biggest misconceptions your clients have about attorneys or clients in general? That were magicians, that if you pay us, it goes away. I don't necessarily get that a lot, but I hear that from other attorneys often that their clients get frustrated because the case didn't get dismissed because they paid them X amount of money.

Another thing is I may have a case that is it's a bad case and this is the best we're going to be able to do. And we put all the resources and all the work into it. And they get mad and they say, well, I'll pay you X amount more to make this. And it's like, it doesn't work like that. There's no amount of money that you can pay me to make my job or to make me do my job better than I've already done for you. It's not going to change anything.

So that's a big one I deal with often. Now, do you think people with money have it an advantage though in court? Well, I think they have an advantage for two reasons because, one, you have more money, you can hire a better representation. So you have that advantage, but also you have the advantage of, like, say, for a fraud case and you're on the hook for a million dollars. But I have money and I can give you your restitution right now and some. And that may buy you some time out of prison or maybe I can stay out now because I can pay my restitution now. Whereas somebody that doesn't have the ability to do so, that's not even on. the table. So yeah, I do think money plays a role. Do you think paying the restitution full before

sentencing makes a big difference in the sentence? It can. I think it would definitely be something that would be considered by any judge. Hey, they've already taken responsibility. They've paid the restitution. I don't know, you know, it wouldn't affect the guidelines at all, but I think when we're talking about 3553 factors and stuff like that, yeah, I do think there's an argument to be made that they've already paid it off. How do you feel about the political aspect in the criminal justice system? And what I mean by that is, you know, every time there's a new president, new U.S. attorneys come in and they have different priorities. I hate it. I don't like it. I mean, as a defense attorney, that changes everything for us, right? It's, it shouldn't be political. It shouldn't matter,

but it does. And every time a new president comes, the U.S. Attorney's Office completely changes. A lot people go, a lot of people come. It messes up the flow of our cases. It messes up cases in the sense of trying to resolve them because now you have somebody coming in that sees it different. I mean, sometimes it's beneficial, but a lot of times it isn't or it starts it over because now they've got to be brought up to speed because of whatever this new U.S. attorney wants, right? Because they all run the office different. Do you ever see cases dropped when the change happens? Yes. And it could, I guess, be vice versa, new charges added.

Yeah. What I see most often is the guidelines change, right? Because they're looking at it differently. And they either see enhancements that the other prosecutor didn't think applied or they see the case. I had a case recently where the prosecutor that took over, she just saw it completely different. And I had an offer that was so ridiculous. And a new set of eyes got on it And she agreed that the offer was completely ridiculous

And it was based on it was a guideline offer But the guidelines were ridiculous And she came in and she re-evaluated the case And she gave me a new offer And ultimately ended up diversion Just by a new set of eyes It went from like 18 years in custody To a diversion case

And the client should have got diversion It wasn't like a miracle I worked But it was the change in the prosecutor Can you explain the diversion aspect to the criminal justice system? So diversion is tough. But most jurisdictions, federal most jurisdictions, but even state,

if you're a first-time offender, you have no criminal history, you have to admit your fault. But you have great mitigation, right? You have all these great things going on. It may have just been a lapse in judgment. You may qualify for diversion. And diversion is essentially your interview with probation or if it's a diversion program. And if they accept you, you do whatever the period is.

I know for us in Atlanta, for federal, it's usually 12 months. They do 12 months, 12 months of like a probationary period. And if you complete that, fine, your case goes away. It's dismissed. And that's not like a, you have to cooperate. Bonjour, compadre. It's the price line negotiator. How do I negotiate so many great travel deals? My greatest gadget. The price line app. It's got hotel deals, flight deals, rental car deals, those deals in a bundle. Deals. Game Day deals. Concert trip deals. No one deals more deals than price line. Hold your horses. There's more. The app let you filter hotels by neighborhood, vibe, star level, and amenities like pools and spas and beach fronts and wait, I'm not done.

Stop cutting me off. Introducing the new best skin ever ultra slim precision concealer from Sephora Collection. It's full coverage with a matte finish and perfect for any look. Whether you're building it up for a full glam moment or targeting correction for a more natural vibe. At only $12, it's great for affordable touch-ups on the go.

Get this new must-have concealer at Sephora or at saffora.com today. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough. Enough to get lost.

Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your ocean. front room, just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay.

Hilton, for the stay. A type thing, it usually isn't any cooperation. Do you think that's a fair system to clients, or is it picky and choosy? I think it's too picky and choosy. And the reason is a lot of charges don't qualify for it. And it's like you can have the exact same mitigation,

the exact same background, the exact same circumstances, and it could be like one factor. Oh, there was a gun involved. Didn't use the gun, didn't touch the gun, but there was a gun involved, so now you can't have diversion. So I do like diversion, but it's rare that people, especially federally, get diversion. Now, how do you feel about clients cooperating?

Ultimately, it's up to the client. Now, I will say, I will, advise them. I usually advise against cooperation. My personal opinion is, if you made your bed, you need to lie on it, you don't drag other people down with you. That's personally, but ultimately, the client gets to do what they want to do. So if I have a client that chooses to cooperate, it's fine, and we're cooperating. It's not often. It's a lot more often than frequent in the federal system. But I'm not going to sit here and say I'm one of those attorneys that I don't allow cooperation because a lot of attorneys say that you're lying if your client wants to cooperate

you have to let them cooperate but by no means i don't push it now we see in a lot of these high profile say hip-hop rapper cases where someone's paperwork gets put out that they took a plea deal and some people consider that say snitching do you think that a plea deal just admitting to guilt is snitching technically or no i think that is ridiculous yeah i think that's ridiculous i have had this argument till i turned purple um just in general and about specific people, I think it's ridiculous if they took a plea. Now, if that plea harms other people, then maybe it gets a little different. But if they just took a plea to take whatever sentence they deem fit, that's whatever.

I guess the issue people are saying, which I don't agree with, is if you plead out to, say, gang-related charges, then you're admitting that you were in a gang, so therefore the people on the case are in a gang as well. That's what people are claiming. Yeah, but being in a gang isn't illegal. So even if, I know that was the whole issue, but if you know the law in Georgia, at least, being a gang isn't illegal. You admitting you're in a gang, that's cool, that's fine, you can be in the gang. I've been to trial where I, that's the first thing I admitted, yeah, we're in a gang.

But what they're saying that I did in the gang isn't true. So the problem is you can't be in a gang and then commit a crime to further that gang. So admitting that you're in a gang as part of a plea deal, whatever. Now, can that be plea, can that plea deal be entered in as evidence? in someone else? How does that work? Yeah, it can't. Well, it depends how it's written, right?

So some do an Alford plea. That cannot, because an Alford plea is essentially saying, I'm pleading guilty because it's in my best interest. In my best interest, I can't even speak, in my best interest, giving the evidence that I've seen right, but I'm not admitting guilt. I'm not admitting I did this stuff,

but I don't think it's going to go well at trial, so I'm going to plea under Alford. That, no, it can't be used because, you didn't admit to guilt. You didn't admit to anything. Now, if you plead guilty and you have a plea agreement signed and you take the stand, you take the stand in the case. And when you take the stand, you say something opposite of what that plea agreement says.

And yes, it's coming in. So it can come in, but not necessarily. Now, in regards to testifying, is there a way around not testifying? Like, say, you're served a subpoena. do you have to go or can you plead the fifth or how does that work? Well, if you're served a subpoena, I would call an attorney and I would try to get my attorney to quash the subpoena. There's different ways that subpoenas can be quashed, right? But if it can be quashed and you have to testify, you know, the fifth only bars you

from self-incrimination. So you can't plead the fifth for everything, right? We saw cases where they asked, what's your name, plead the fifth. That's not how that works. But they can't force you to testify to anything that's going to say you did anything wrong, right? So that's when you complete the fifth. Now, the only way out of a subpoena is you just don't show up, but then they have the power and ability to go lock you up and hold you in contempt. So can someone get the subpoena, go on the stand and not say anything, stay silent? Or are you going to be in contempt for that too?

Up to the judge. The judge can hold you in contempt for it. So they could physically make a person talk, then? By threatening you with contempt, I think we saw that in the YSL trial. You don't want to talk on the stand today where we're going to throw you in contempt. And they can only hold you in contempt until the duration of the trial. But when you have trials that last a damn year, yeah, they can make you sit. How do you feel on that point about some of these trials that keep getting pushed and pushed and push and people are waiting six, seven years in prison, awaiting trial?

It depends why you're waiting trial. if the state is pushing it, that's ridiculous because you should have an attorney, whether it's a public defender or a defense attorney, to push the issue. There's no way you should be sitting pretrial seven years. I can't even imagine how that, like in Georgia, how that would happen without somebody's consenting to that, right? The defense attorney has to allow that. But I think it's bull crap. You're sitting, again, seven years, if it gets pushed out that far, you need to be released. Let them fight it from the outside. What do you think is a major change you want seeing made in the criminal justice system if you had that power? I think you talked about them. The pretrial release, I think any time that you do pretrial where there's any restriction, even if it's just reporting monthly, that has to account for some type of credit. I think that's a major one. I think the violations, the probation violations, I think that's a big one too. I don't think people should be held in custody necessarily on a probation violation without,

one, if it's new charges, without being convicted of those charges or having a hearing for the violation. I think everybody on probation, for the most part, should be able to have a walk-in hearing. I don't think you should have to wait, sit in custody and wait for a probation hearing. That one bothers me also. How do you think young Nicole would see you now, teenage Nicole? She would be shocked. Like I said in the beginning, being a lawyer was never like in my plan book. I didn't know lawyers.

I didn't even cross my mind. It was kind of just like anything that has, something has happened at some point in my life for every time I progressed, right? Going to college, going to get my master's, being a probation officer, going to law school. There was no like, hey, this is the end goal. And I'm the same way now. So I think little Nicole would be excited, excited to see what you got going on next. So impressed because I didn't come from, I came from shit, like literally shit. And I say that now gracefully because I didn't feel it then, right?

I never felt like I didn't come from shit until I'm older and look back like damn. That was kind of rough. little Nicole, if you would have told her this was going to be big Nicole, it would be so unrealistic that it would have went in one ear or not the other. But I think little Nicole would be excited. When you look at all the cases you've represented as a whole, what do you think is a life lesson you take away from those? Oh man, so many. A life lesson that I would take away from my cases as a whole. That's such a good question. Because I can answer that so many different ways. It must make you appreciate life more, right?

For sure, but also it makes me work so much harder because I get to be the voice. I get to be the voice for the people that don't have a voice and that may have never had a voice. So it pushes me. So I think the life lesson would be to kind of keep that mentality, the very humble, hey, you've got to speak for them because they can't. But that mentality keeps me, like even when I write, when I write argument, or write sentencing memos,

that mentality is what do I need the judge to know about them that they can't tell the judge? I get a lot of compliments for my writing now, but that's right, because I'm thinking about, I got to put my all into everything, right? Because this is all they got, which goes back to what I said before. If you're a client of mine where I don't feel like I could put my all into you,

we have to divorce. It's not going to work. Well, Nicole, I appreciate you coming on the show today. Thank you for having me. I had a good time. Good. See, it wasn't as bad as you thought it would be. No, it was very quick.

Yeah, it goes good when you're having a good conversation. Yeah. Well, thanks again. Thank you.