SEAN GOLDSTEIN, ESQ.
SPEEDING/TRAFFIC TICKET AND CRIMINAL DEFENSE LAWYER
Speeding/Traffic City of Duluth v. R.C.
Defendant charged with speeding 66/45. Officer made numerous mistakes when issuing the ticket. Case was eventually dismissed due to problems with Officer credibility.
State (Fulton County) v. D.K.
Defendant charged with speeding for going 94 in a 55. Case reduced to warning.
State (Wilkes and Banks County) v. L.S.
Defendant charged with speeding in two separate counties on same day. After presenting mitigating medical evidence on the part of the Defendant, both cases were reduced to basic rules violations.
City of Dunwoody v. M.K.
M.K. charged with impeding an intersection. We were hired the day before the case was supposed to go to trial. After investigating the case, we discovered that the Dunwoody Police Department Officer had taken a job with the Federal ATF despite being told by the prosecution and the Dunwoody Police Department that the officer would be in court to testify. On the day of trial, the City offered a plea to a lesser charge. After being confronted with the fact that we knew the prosecution would not be able to produce their officer, the City agreed to dismiss the charge before trial.
City of Dunwoody v. S.D.
S.D. charged with speeding 83 in a 55. After a thorough case review, we determined that there was a problem with the form of the ticket as issued to S.D. The case was dismissed at arraignment.
City of Commerce v. D.R.
D.R. charged with speeding 90 in a 65. Once mitigating circumstances were provided to the City, the City agreed to dismiss the case before trial.
G.S. charged with aggravated battery and aggravated assault for allegedly stabbing her husband. After a jury trial in which Sean pointed out various inconsistencies in the State’s physical evidence and possible dishonesty on behalf of husband to win custody of the children, G.S. was found not guilty on all charges.
State (Douglas County) v. J.S.
Defendant charged with possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute. After we presented problems with the search of Defendant’s car and problems with the evidence, the case was dismissed before trial.
State (Gwinnett County) v. J.H.
Defendant charged with felony possession of Xanax and other controlled substances. After discovery reviewed, we determined that the Defendant had arguable legal right to possess the substances. Upon presentation of this to the State, the case was reduced to a misdemeanor. Under the plea agreement, the Defendant was not convicted, and the charge was expunged from her record.
State (Gwinnett County) v. S.S.
Defendant charged with battery. Defendant, an immigrant from South Korea, was a green card holder and was facing deportation based on the charges. Through a thorough evidence review and negotiations with the Solicitor-General, the battery charges were dismissed before indictment so that Defendant had no chance of being deported. Defendant was charged only with disorderly conduct and granted entry into the pretrial diversion program. Under the terms of the agreement, the arrest and the outcome were expunged from Defendant’s record.
State (Gwinnett County) v. S.K.
S.K was an immigrant from South Korea facing deportation after being charged with arson. After a through evidence review, Attorney Goldstein was able to negotiate a plea bargain to the lesser charge of criminal damage to property in the second degree. This charge allowed S.K. to not be deported, and he continues to live in the United States to this day.
Attorney Sean Goldstein represents Georgia drivers and the presumed innocent in Georgia traffic ticket and criminal defense cases in Metro Atlanta and across the State of Georgia. We primarily serve Gwinnett and Dekalb counties, and also the cities of Atlanta, Duluth, Doraville, Sandy Springs, Lawrenceville, Dunwoody, Sandy Springs, Marietta, Norcross, and Chamblee.
Call to schedule your free initial consultation today
Contact Goldstein Law Group LLC online or at 678-757-5529 to schedule your free initial consultation. We also speak Korean.
These case results are not typical and should not be used to predict the outcome of any criminal case.