William B. Price, Attorney at Law                            

Don't Be Like Mike

State of Alabama vs. "Mike"- In Mr. Price's first trial ever, "Mike," insisting on his innocence that he had no alcohol whatsoever to drink the night he was arrested, demanded a trial before a judge.  After the State rested its case, "Mike" wanted to testify.  Against the advice of counsel, "Mike" got on the witness stand to tell his side of things. 

Going through the laundry list of infractions which "Mike" had been accused of, and arguing away each violation with a plausible explanation (reason for sliding across the road= rainy conditions; reason for spinning the wheels= did not drive a stick shift; reason for expired tag= registered in sister's name; etc...), resulted in 15 infractions being dismissed against "Mike."

However, with one detail left to cover with the court, we embarked on the issue of DUI.  Being sure of "Mike's" answer having covered the issue of whether he had any alcohol the night he was arrested I began to ask the accused if he had been drinking. "'Mike, there is really only one thing left to tell the court.  That night you were arrested, had you had anything to drink at all before you drove that car?"  He looked at the attorneys with a sincere expression and said, "Oh sure, I had a few beers."

"Mike" was cleared of all but one charge.  Please don't be like "Mike."

State of Florida v. "Billy"- "Billy" was accused of Felony Battery on a Night Club Employee after he and his "friends" beat the club employee beyond recognition.  His "friend" wanted to testify for him to say "Billy" was just trying to protect himself.

Mr. Price asked if "Billy" would have been the aggressor, and "Billy's friend" said "no."  When asked if he knew about "Billy's" reputation in the community for peacefulness and non-violence, "Billy's" so-called "friend" responded by saying, "Well, I don't know about no reputation, but everybody call him a drug dealer."

With friends like that, who needs the prosecutor?

In many criminal statutes there is no "intent" requirement in establishing guilt.  For instance, to be guilty of battery, one must INTEND to hit another.  There is no crime for accidently having physical contact.  But some crimes can be committed by accident.  For example, sexual relations with an underage person, even if that underage person lies about their age, can still be a crime regardless of intent.

Sometimes, the status of the law regarding intent is unclear.  In the case of State of Alabama vs. Wood, Betty Wood, a City Counselwoman was accused of using her political office for financial gain by voting to improve the roads in her district.  Working with lead counsel, Buddy Armstrong, Mr. Price successfully overcame the Alabama Attorney General's argument that ANY action taken, or vote made, by a politician, which may have later benefited that political office holder, was a fraudulent abuse of power. 

Of course, the Attorney General was wrong, but the status of the Alabama statutes governing this area was untested.  Our argument, that intent was necessary to establish culpability, was the correct argument.  Therefore, our client was acquitted of all charges, and case precedence was established allowing free voting of public officials in the best interest of their constituency.

God bless America!