Blog

Malicious Wounding in Virginia Takes Three Forms

Unlawful Wounding: A Lesser Offense to Malicious Wounding in Virginia

Milwaukee Man to Face Single Trial in Seven Murders Spanning Several Years

When Drug Dealers Call the Cops

As a criminal defense lawyer in Richmond, Virginia, I have been involved in hundreds of prosecutions in state and federal courts. All of them have been unique in some way, but one was a real doosie.

In a recent case I tried in Henrico County (Virginia) Circuit Court, a jury found my client not guilty of seven felony charges, including two counts of using a firearm in the commission of a felony, two counts of firing into an occupied vehicle, and two counts of attempted malicious wounding. While I would like to take all the credit for the outcome, upon reflection, I have determined the most likely reason is that people -- and specifically the people on this jury -- are just fed up with drug dealers, and  are frustrated at the inability of law enforcement at all levels to win a "war on drugs" that has been on-going since Richard Nixon was elected president in 1968. You see, my client's actions that prompted the charges against him was taking the law -- and a gun -- into his own hands to stop a pair of drug dealers from selling his (tragically addicted) boss heroin. As the case unfolded, a couple of things became clear to me.

One, some drug dealers do not fear the police, or even long periods of incarceration (one of the drug dealers in the case had served prison terms of 8 and 2 years on previous convictions, and was on probation for the last one; the other was on probation for a distribution conviction just 6 months earlier for which he had received a 5 year suspended sentence). Like most law-breakers, they correctly assume that law enforcement officers are not going to shoot at them unless they attempt to shoot first. Moreover, they view themselves as businessmen who see jail as a potential -- though not certain -- risk that is worthwhile given the profit margin in drug sales.

Two, drug dealers do not like to be on the business end of a loaded gun wielded by anyone, but especially someone willing to risk his own life in a high-speed chase to stop them. My client would not have been charged except for the fact that these idiot dealers called the police themselves because they felt they should not have been exposed to such violence in carrying out their "business." Despite their confessions to the police that they were in the process of making a drug sale that my guy stopped, they were not charged with any crime (except for the driver, who was cited for driving while his license was suspended for his recent drug conviction) related to their attempt to sell a Schedule I controlled substance. On cross-examination, the chief investigator could only say there was "insufficient evidence" to bring any charges against them -- even though it was clear there was sufficient evidence to convict for an attempted drug sale.

At trial, the Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney had the distasteful task of letting the bad guys go free, to prosecute the "white hat." Perhaps the reasoning behind that decision was to set an example that private citizens must let the police handle drug cases and not take matters into their own hands. Law enforcement is better suited to solve crimes than "Joe Public," but in this case, twelve people disagreed.

Malicious Woundings on Rise in Henrico?