Blog
DISCREDITED POLICE TESTIMONY
Court of Appeals Vacates Conviction after Finding Prior Lies By Police Officer Probative and Relevant, Cross-Examination Should Have Been Allowed
By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Police have credibility through their perceived authority and oath to protect and serve the community. Juries in most instances believe law enforcement officers, even when their testimony is border-line preposterous. Some jurors even believe that if a police officer is lying, she must have a good reason for doing so, probably because the defendant is “bad.”
Imagine the following scenario: A police officer testifies in court, at a federal pre-trial hearing, that he stopped and frisked a drug user based on information he received from an unidentified informant. The police officer says he found the suspected drugs and made an arrest. But, before the case ever reaches a trial, the police officer’s pre-trial testimony is completely discredited, some of which is determined to be outright false. In fact, the judge hearing the officer’s testimony says parts of his testimony were not worthy of belief (in layman’s terms, he’s a liar). A few years later the same officer, under similar circumstances, arrestsyoufollowing a stop and frisk. Do you believe your attorney should have the right on cross-examination to elicit testimony about the officer’s prior false testimony in order to impeach his testimony against you? The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently answered this question.
Lance White was convicted of possession of a weapon by a felon. He was sentenced to 235 months in a Federal prison. In August 2008, a joint task force of the FBI and the New York Police Department, based on information from a confidential informant, stopped a minivan occupied by Smith and four female companions in Queens, New York. A search of the vehicle produced three firearms with one allegedly being found in White’s right front pocket and the other two in one of the women’s purse. White and the four women were arrested on a state charge of illegal possession of firearms. The state charge was subsequently dismissed after White was charged with the Federal offense of a felon being in possession of a firearm.
Prior to trial, the U.S. District Court excluded two pieces of crucial evidence: First, that the women in the minivan had been initially charged with possessing the firearm allegedly found in White’s possession; and, second, that prior discredited testimony of one of the Government’s law enforcement officers was not probative and relevant. On August 30, 2012, the Second Circuit reversed White’s conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. The appeals court based its reversal on a decision, United States v. Cedeno, it handed down last year which set forth seven factors a trial court should consider when determining whether prior false testimony is probative and relevant. The sevenCedenofactors are:
- Whether the prior judicial finding addressed the witness’s veracity in that specific case or generally;
- Whether the two sets of testimony involved similar subject testimony;
- Whether the lie was under oath or was made in a less formal context;
- Whether the lie was about a significant subject matter;
- How much time had elapsed since the lie was told and whether there had been any intervening credibility determination;
- The apparent motive for the lie and whether a similar motive existed in the current proceeding; and
- Whether the witness offered a plausible explanation for the lie.
The trial court in White’s case did not have the benefit of theCedenodecision when it prevented his attorney from eliciting information about the prior false law enforcement testimony. Defense counsel tried to establish the prior false testimony because there was “lab evidence” that one of the four women possessed all three weapons, including the one supposedly found in White’s pocket. Defense counsel wanted to present evidence that U.S. District Court Judge Fredrick Block, in the case of Phoenix Goines, had found that testimony given by NYPDDetective Paul Herrmannwas not worthy of belief. Like Lance White, Goines had been charged with illegal possession of a firearm seized by Herrmann in a street encounter. After hearing Hermann’s testimony at a pretrial suppression hearing, Judge Block granted the motion to suppress the gun and ammunition seized in the case because he did not find Herrmann’s account of what happened before, during, and after Goines arrest to be credible.
The Government in White’s case moved the trial court to preclude White’s defense counsel from using the Goines case on cross-examination of Herrmann during White’s trial. The trial court granted the Government’s motion, saying Judge Block in the Goines case had made no finding of Herrmann’s “general veracity” and that the Goines case was “entirely unrelated” to White’s case. The Second Circuit, however, disagreed and went on to explained why Herrmann’s testimony in White’s case was so crucial:
“At trial, the Government introduced testimony from several of the officers who were present during White’s arrest. The main Government witness was Hermann, a junior member of then NYPD Major Case Unit. Hermann testified that, as part of a joint FBI and NYPD investigation, he and his partners learned that White would be traveling in a maroon minivan near 155th Street and 115th Drive in Jamaica, Queens. Hermann and Lieutenant Sandro Rizzotti were traveling in an unmarked car driven by Sergeant Frank Cuarino. The other members of the team traveled in two unmarked police cars.
“After stopping the minivan, Herrmann and Rizzotti walked to the passenger side of the van while Guarino approached the driver, ‘engaged [her] in conversation,’ andasked her to get out of the vehicle. Herrmann testified that he heard Guarino tell White ‘in the back [seat] to stop moving around.’ Herrmann ‘then opened up the sliding door to the passenger side and asked [White] to show [him] his hands and step out of the vehicle.’ Rizzotti similarly testified that it was ‘[r]ight after’ Guarino directed the driver out of the minivan that he said, ‘[Y]ou stop with your hands,’ and that it was ‘[a]t that point,’ not at some later time, that Herrmann opened the passenger door.
“Certain portions of Herrmann’s testimony were inconsistent. While, on direct examination, Herrmann did not testify that White had been talking on a cell phone before he was frisked, on cross examination, he acknowledged that White had been on a cell phone ‘briefly.’ Defense counsel also questioned him about whether Guarino had told White to stop talking on the phone. Herrmann initially testified that he did not remember any of this, but after his recollection was refreshed with a previous affidavit, he recalled that White was talking on a cell phone while Guarino was talking to the driver, and that Guarino told White to stop speaking on the phone. Herrmann denied that it was the motion of White putting away the phone that caused him to open the back door of the minivan. Instead, Herrmann testified that he opened the car door after White put away the phone, when Guarino subsequently told White to stop moving. Herrmann admitted, however, that he had stated in a prior sworn affidavit ‘Sergeant Guarino then told the defendant in sum and substance to stop moving around in the back of the minivan, [and] the defendant stated that he was putting away his cellular phone.’
“After White stepped out of the minivan, Herrmann frisked White. Herrmann testified that while frisking White, he felt a firearm in the right front pocket of White’s jeans and shouted ‘hot lunch,’ code words that White was carrying a firearm. Rizzotti testified that when he heard the words ‘hot lunch,’ he was standing behind White and handcuffed him. Herrmann further stated that after White was handcuffed, he (Herrmann) removed a ‘Cobra, .380 caliber handgun,’ ‘[s]ilver with a black handle,’ ‘loaded with seven bullets’ from White’s pocket. Rizzotti and Federal Agent Kieran Smith testified that they observed Herrmann take the gun from White’s pocket.
“Herrmann, again, faltered in his account of the search, however. He first testified that he also retrieved White’s cell phone from White’s pocket. When asked if he had taken White’s wallet from his back left pocket, he said he could not ‘recall where [he] got it from.’ He then testified that he was not sure whether White had a wallet and added that the ‘only thing [he] recovered was the firearm.’ He did not ‘recall’ recovering a cell phone, keys, or a wallet from White.
“Herrmann further testified that, after recovering the firearm from White’s pocket, he went around to the driver’s side of the minivan and ‘observed a gray canvas bag that had a firearm inside of it.’ He searched the bag and ‘found another firearm.’ On cross-examination, Herrmann acknowledged a prior sworn affidavit stating that Guarino had searched the minivan and told Herrmann that he ‘found a revolver inside the purse lying on the rear seat.’ Rizzotti testified that two firearms were recovered from the interior of the vehicle, but testified that he had no personal knowledge of how this came about. Smithtestified that Guarino noticed a handbag on the driver’s side of the rear seat and alerted Smith and Herrmann to the presence of two firearms in the purse, after which Herrmann recovered the guns. In Smith’s prior sworn affidavit, he made no mention of the recovery of a second gun, but explained that he might not have been asked what firearms were found at the scene, where they were found, or whether there was a second gun.
“During the cross-examination of Herrmann, in response to the testimony that two firearms were found in the purse at the scene, the defense sought to introduce impeachment evidence in the form of a portion of the Government’s memorandum of law on an earlier suppression motion. That memorandum stated that ‘[t]he purse was . . . taken to the precinct, at which time an additional handgun was recovered from inside the purse.’ Defense counsel offered this statement as an admission by a party opponent pursuant toFederal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2).The Government, in opposition, argued that because the statement was an attorney-drafted summary of the statements of three different officers, it was not admissible, as a prior inconsistent statement, to impeach Herrmann. The Government also noted that if the court admitted the document, the main prosecutor in the case would be required to take the stand to explain his basis for what were his statements. The court said that it did not want to ‘open the door to that’ and ruled that the authority provided by the defense to support introduction of the evidence did not go ‘to the issue of courts admitting contents of memoranda that are submitted to the court by counsel.’”
Rule 608(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides a trial court with discretion to allow a witness’s “character for truthfulness” to be “inquired into” on cross examination if evidence to the contrary is “probative of the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness” of a witness. The Second Circuit in theCedenocase pointed out that while a trial court may place “reasonable limits” on cross examination to protect against “harassment, prejudice, confusion, and waste,” the court must nonetheless “give wide latitude to a defendant in a criminal case to cross-examine government witnesses.” While it has long been the position of the Second Circuit that a witness can be cross-examined based on “prior occasions when his testimony in other cases had been criticized by [a] court as unworthy of belie,” White’ attorney wanted to cross examine Herrmann relative to Judge Block’s lacking of credibility finding against the officer in the Goines case.
The Second Circuit said the trial court in the White case had concluded that Judge Block’s lack of credibility finding against Herrmann was not probative or relevant in the that case. Specifically, the appeals court rejected the Government’s attempt to distinguish the fact-situation ofCedenofrom the Goines case:
“White argues that the district court, like the lower court inCedeño, erred in considering only the twoCruzfactors. The Government demurs, arguing that Cedeño is entirely inapplicable because it involved a finding that the witness had previously lied: specifically, the Government claims that while Judge Block found certain aspects of Herrmann’s testimony not credible, he did not expressly find that Herrmann had lied and hence …Cedeño[does not apply]. We reject this distinction.A finding that a witness is not credible is not fundamentally different from a finding that the witness lied. It often just reflects a fact finder’s desire to use more gentle language. Nothing, moreover, suggests thatCedeñois limited to explicit findings that a witness lied. The instant case, therefore, is controlled by our decision in Cedeño.”
Having made it clear that there is no real difference in findings of lack of credibility and lying, the appellate court made its position abundant clear:
“Significantly, the additional factors we identified inCedeñoweigh strongly in favor of admissibility here. First, Herrmann’s testimony was made under oath in a judicial proceeding. Second, his testimony plainly involved an important matter: at issue inGoineswas whether a firearm and ammunition seized by law enforcement officials should be suppressed. Third, the suppression hearing inGoinestook place on February 26, 2009, just months before White’s trial on December 14, 2009. Fourth, in attempting to secure a conviction, the motive for Herrmann’s discredited testimony inGoinesis identical to his purported motive in the instant case. Finally, Herrmann offered no explanation for the previous inconsistencies in his testimony.
“Guided byCedeño, we have little trouble concluding that Judge Block’s prior credibility finding against Herrmann was relevant and highly probative in this case. The defendant inGoines, like White, was charged with possession of a firearm. The district court in that case unequivocally discredited Herrmann’s testimony; it concluded that it could not ‘credit’ some of Herrmann’s testimony and that portions of Herrmann’s testimony ‘conflict[ed] with his earlier testimony.’ The district court even suggested that Herrmann himself had recanted certain aspects of his testimony.(‘The Court does not credit Herrmann’s testimony that Goines broke into a run; this testimony is contradicted not only by Goines’s testimony at the evidentiary hearing, but also by Herrmann’s own testimony at the parole hearing and his eventual acknowledgment at the evidentiary hearing that Goines did not have time to run away before he was tackled.’) Further, the court implied that Herrmann had lied in a state-court criminal complaint with respect to the same incident.(‘The Court does not credit that Goines ‘punch[ed]’ Herrmann, as Herrmann stated in the state-court criminal complaint, or that Goines swung at Herrmann’s face, as Herrmann testified at the evidentiary hearing.’) These credibility judgments are plainly probative of Herrmann’s veracity and could affect a jury’s determination as to his willingness to lie to secure a criminal conviction. Moreover, they are particularly relevant in the case before us where the crux of the defense was that Herrmann lied about finding a weapon in White’s pocket instead of elsewhere in the vehicle.
“We find the district court’s conclusion to the contrary erroneous. The district court noted that while Judge Block discredited certain aspects of Herrmann’s testimony, he relied on other portions. In that vein, the court opined that the inconsistencies in Herrmann’s testimony could have been because of passage of time, confusion, or lack of first-hand knowledge. We agree with White that this reading ofGoinesis ‘insupportable.’ Judge Block did not attribute any such innocent explanation to Herrmann’s discredited testimony. He instead repeatedly emphasized that he could not credit the testimony, portions of which Herrmann himself was forced to disavow on cross-examination. In choosing to excuse Herrmann’s discredited testimony by ascribing blameless reasons and explanations to it, without even a hint from theGoinescourt in support of such explanations, the district court clearly erred.
“Moreover, the district court’s fear that admitting the evidence would confuse the jury because it would require the attorneys to delve into the factsand history of theGoinescase is misplaced. The district court retained the authority to ‘impose ‘reasonable limits’ on cross-examination to protect against, e.g., harassment, prejudice, confusion, and waste.’ Furthermore, and dispositively, the defense simply sought to inquire ‘whether [Herrmann] previously gave testimony . . . under oath, in another federal gun possession case, and whether the judge in that case refused to credit six different aspects of [that] testimony.’ It did not seek to delve into the facts of theGoinescase or inquire about the specific instances when Herrmann’s testimony was discredited. The Government could have asked the opposite: whether theGoinescourt also relied on some aspects of Herrmann’s testimony. This line of questioning would have given White the ‘wide latitude’ that should be afforded to criminal defendants when cross-examining a Government witness, while allaying the district court’s fear that the evidence would ‘invite . . . distraction and confusion of the jury’
“To the extent the district court’s consideration of jury confusion was targeted at the Rule 403analysis, we also disagree that any such jury confusion would substantially outweigh the probative value of Judge Block’s adverse credibility finding. The district court characterized the prior credibility finding as ‘far afield from the actual issues in the case.’ We disagree …”
Lying is lying. It should always be a probative and relevant issue in a criminal trial because the very purpose of such a trial is to seek the truth. So we applaud the Second Circuit ruling. Too many innocent people are languishing in American prisons today because the police fabricated evidence, lied under oath, or “fudged the truth” to such a degree that it amounted to borderline perjury. If a witness testifies falsely, especially a law enforcement officer, in an earlier criminal proceeding, the juries in future cases in which the witness testifies should be apprised of the prior false testimony.
By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
John Floyd is Board Certified in Criminal Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Take the first step toward protecting your freedom by contacting us now
Testimonials
John T. Floyd Law Firm
3730 Kirby Drive # 750, Houston
-
If you have hired attorneys that meet the Webster dictionary definition, ie: "Attorney " is a person that has a law degree, will not be totally honest, can take your money … More and not earn it, will put you off until he is ready to talk to you, and/or never study your case to be able to defend you. Mr. Floyd is the only attorney that doesn't fit that definition!! You will be delighted to have Mr. John Floyd in your corner! Not one attorney that I have ever met that would ever return a check that I sent to him, because he said I paid him too much! Wow! That right there should tell you something about his integrity!!!!! He has a very calm demeanor and doesn't stretch the truth even if you don't want to hear it, he will tell you the truth. Call and set up an appointment with him and judge for yourself. You are wasting time and money on any other attorney, just hire the best, Mr. Floyd.
-
John T. Floyd and his team are some of the best people! I was able to get a second opinion from them on legal advice. His team has been honest, kind, and very informative which has … More been a huge blesssing.
-
I highly recommend John T. Floyd Lawfirm. They are truly knowledgeable and willing to go the extra mile to defend your innocence. Psalms 35
-
Outstanding!Professional knowledge. Rich experiences. Good outcome.
-
-
The best lawyer I ever encounter with a very good personality. He’s very professional and he will go far and beyond for his clients best interest. He’s definitely a 5 star attorney … More when it comes to delivering. I couldn’t be more happier that I hired him !! 👏👏👏👏
-
-
I can honestly say from what I have seen so far, Floyd is a compassionate soul who cares for his client's. Floyd is by far very knowledgeable in this area. He's currently … More assisting my [Father] on a sex assault. We are all suffering so much as my father is an elder man, but we have faith in God, and Mr. Floyd he can dismissed this outrageous allegation soon. Thank you, yoli
-
I had wonderful experience with this law firm. They were so helpful and knowledgeable of the process.my case was dismissed because of Mr John T Floyd,thank you for everything .
-
I am very happy today my case dismissed God bless Mr John T Floyd very good lawyer thanks you so mush sir
-
I had a great experience with this Law Firm, the kind staff helped me locate a Lawyer even though they were unable to take my case.
They were very helpful, kind and returned my call … More in a timely manner. I would definitely recommend them and use them in the future. -
I can tell that Jone is an excellent attorney in Houston. Personally, he is a great man. In addition to great service and amazing results. Recommended
-
Mr. Floyd is an incredible attorney and human being. He cares about your case, the facts, the law, and your life! I am sorry for whatever situation you are going through, but choosing … More Mr. Floyd, his firm, and their professional experience to help you, will be the best decision you ever make!
-
John T Floyd is a straight shooter! He was very direct and responsive to my phone calls and questions. I was in awe of his knowledge, and professional decorum! The best decision that … More you could make is to schedule a consultation with him before considering anyone else!
-
I asked the Law Office of John T. Floyd a very important question regarding the legal aspects of purchasing a firearm with a deferred adjudication charge. They answered the question … More very professionally and accurately and I was quite pleased with the information that was shared. I recommend this law firm because they are very honest and will work for you and with you.
-
I’ve never been one to write reviews but this time I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to say something. I had some serious legal questions I needed answers to concerning Texas laws. … More Being I’m from another state, I found and reached out to Attorney John Floyd for the answers. Mr Floyd listened to to my requests and told me what he need from me and went out of his way to get me the answers. Very polite, straightforward and professional, I can’t thank him enough for all he’s done. Whatever your legal case may be, I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend Mr Floyd.
-
John & Chris helped my family member get a reduced charge and acceptable plea agreement in place. Their compassion, attention to every detail was what helped carry the day.Truly … More the best of the best.P
-
Mr. Floyd is both ethical and loyal to his clients; two qualities that are hard to find specially in lawyers. I'd definitely recommend him to anyone.Positive
Professionalism …More … More -
Mr. John was very helpful and truly was the reason why my case was dismissed. Thank you so much Mr. John I truly recommend everyone in need to work with him.
-
His service to the community and diligence to helping his clients speaks for its self! Not to mention the many articles, papers and TV appearances that speak to his intellect
-
John has given Excellent service and have been very friendly and extremely helpful to us. I highly recommend this law firm
-
This law firm is diligent, responsive and succeeded in getting my case dismissed. 10/10 would recommend.
-
super knowledgeable, good attitude, would definitely recommend him
-
Very helpful, knowledgeable and honest.
-
John is an amazing person and lawyer who is actually very understanding of how anxious I got and although it was hard to reach him sometimes because of his schedule, but never worry … More he is on top of things. He is very organized, very smart. I had the experience to go through a trial with him, and he always plans ahead well and is actually open and receptive to any ideas and comments I had and he was quick to decide which is right to use at the moment. I really appreciated working with him and Chris. Great lawyers and great people. As I was reminded by John, I am adding that the Jury reached a not guilty decision on the original charge and on a lesser charge in just 25 minutes. It took more time to write the charge and instructions for the jury than it took them to reach a decision.
-
Highly recommend John T Floyd law firm, great response time and demeanor.I was researching an on-going criminal case, when I found an informative article written by John Floyd (about … More the perils of expert testimony). I called his office, and was very pleased to receive a timely call back. Not only was Mr. Floyd candid and helpful, but he had the kindest demeanor of any attorney that I've dealt with. I am so glad to have found this firm.
-
Although I am not a client, John Floyd contacted me the same day I sent an email requesting advice, answered my questions and even when further to assist with my issue and communicated … More with me the next day. A true credit to his profession and I can only imagine how well he provides services to his actual clients!
-
I give Mr. Floyd 10 Stars if they were available so I'm giving him five that's all that's available. The first time I left a message for him it was on a Friday after … More 5 p.m. and within 15 minutes he called me back I told him I needed to buy a lotto ticket because that has never happened. I knew from our chat and him calling me back that he was different from any attorney I've tried to talk to left messages never got called back they didn't even know what I needed and neither did Mr. Floyd but he did call me back. I was very interested in meeting with mr. Floyd about my case because I felt he was very transparent honest and genuine. If you've ever dealt with attorneys they don't have those traits but Mr. Floyd does. He was very honest with me told me what I could and could not do with my case. He is not egotistical he's very compassionate and he actually reads the documents you sent him unbelievable that's never happened. He will be the only lawyer I refer to anyone that needs his expertise. If you're in need of a criminal defense attorney please give John T Floyd a call you will not be disappointed.
-
Mr John is a great human being and a very knowledgeable attorney. He has always called me back promptly,advised me very clearly and never rushed our conversation. i was wrongfully accused … More and Mr John had my case DISMISSED!! on the day of trial after fighting for me for two years. I am very thankful to the John T. Floyd Law Firm. You will not go wrong with John. Mr John you deserve way more then 5 stars.Thank youShaikh.
-
John Floyd Law Firm is highly recommended for your legal needs. He and his staff are highly professional in every aspect. Easy and comfortable feeling talking with him, and he understands … More your needs and explains your legal advice in a way you can understand. Enough just cant be said. Thank You Sir.Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
John was kind enough to assist me with legal advise on my firearm gun rights restoration. I highly recommend him and his firm. Very professional and knowledgeable. If I need assistance … More in the future I will definitely go back to him.
-
What I liked the most was that he actually returned my phone after leaving a message unlike pretty much everyone else I called prior. He listened and answered my question with the best … More advice that would benefit me the most. I was actually lost from moving to Texas from a different state we’re laws vary and he pointed me toward the right direction to get a understanding of if I need to do business with him now or after I contact a lawyer in my home state.
-
John T Floyd handled my sons case & got a dismissal for us! He is great to work with, gets back to you promptly & knows what he’s doing. Definitely one of the best we have had … More to deal with!Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
John is honestly the best! The whole team is. He answered me in a timely manner and helped me when my friend was going through a situation in Houston, Texas as an inmate. He was so … More thorough, honest, and without charging me sent me so much information because I was out of the loop. He never once tried to take you for your money, he did all that he could to. help me and I can't thank him enough.
-
I have used John on two occasions and found him to have full knowledge of Texas law, diligent, creative in plan, and aggressive in defense. He is the best criminal defense attorney … More in the State of Texas. No reason to look elsewhere.
-
I have been calling to get some legal advice pertaining to gun rights. A few legal offices would not even take my call because quote " your not a client and Im losing money. … More I I called John T. Floyd Law Firm and they were not only able to answer my question, but gave great detail information, and further elaborated on their answer. I hope I do not have to use them in the future, but if I do need to, they will be my first call.
-
Great lawyer! Needed some advice and gave me a Consultation, and advice for steps to take, without any hassle l, Was a honest guy and actually wanted to help me and not just take my … More money! Highly recommend!!Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
Attorney Floyd replied very timely to my inquiry and he provided practical advice. I will not hesitate to contact him in the future if I need additional legal counsel.
-
Highly recommend, down to earth lawyer. Talked to me about my legal issues without being super money hungry and genuinely wanted to help me with my legal problems. 5 stars ⭐️.
-
Very knowledgeable and professional. I called and left a message Friday morning and before end of business that day I received a call back.Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism … More …More -
Very helpful highly recommended for any Question / case will definitely keep he's name and number for any other legal advice
-
Excellent service and a lawyer that doesn't lie. He does what he says. JW recommends him.
-
One of the best services Ive used in awhile. Thank you for all the help and answers. You got my life back. Thank youPositive
Quality …More -
Im impressed. This guy was polite and professional and most important...he listened.
-
Good experience and very good lawyer
-
-
-
Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, ValueMore -
It was a pleasure speaking with John. He is knowledgeable and has a true desire to help the people of society. I turned to him for some guidance of a long-standing issue. He never … More rushed our conversation and went out of his way to look into the details to provide the right answer as well as assist me anyway he could. Thank you for our conversations and I wish your and your firm the best. If you need a lawyer, John Floyd is your guy!
-
John represented me in court for roughly 2 years. I won't (and shouldn't) get into any serious details, but let me tell you that I couldn't have chosen anyone better. … More Seriously.Every appearance in court I felt very comfortable. The judge and DA's had a high regard for his reputation. There is a time I recall where simply his presence greatly impacted the court's interpretation of my case and persons. We were in front of the stand and the judge could not stop talking about John's prestige and past accomplishments and how that took in relation to my case. I kept silent in front of the judge, but I observed then that John's popularity and reputation within the court had already given me a better looking rapport with the judge. Let me tell you, I never had more confidence then, knowing that the judge held him in such high regard.This is not to mention how personable John is. I'll be honest that during the stress of court, sharing a laugh with your lawyer helps a lot. This may sound a lot, but I really appreciated the relationship we had then. This is also not to mention that he was able to deal very well with any DA that rotated over the years. Seriously, John was great, prompt with information and very hands on with my case. I had great peace those 2 years until everything wrapped up.If you're looking for a lawyer, I highly, HIGHLY recommend the John T. Floyd Law Firm. He IS nationally renowned, you know. He'll get the job done to the utmost confidence. He's very experienced and has a great record to boot. I am glad to have had him represent me in court and trust me that I never thought I'd ever say that (and whoever does?). We explored every avenue of victory together and I personally enjoyed the experience, despite the seriousness of the accusation.If you have a case that needs to be represented at the highest levels, choose John T. Floyd. He's a good man and very good at what he does. Him and his team has the experience you need to make the best decisions and options to get the best outcome for your case. We got the best result I could possibly ask for, thank God.Seriously. Hire John. He knows what he's doing.Seriously.
-
One of the few honest lawyers I have ever talked to. His complimentary consultation was knowledgeable and thorough. He knew exactly what the issue was and how to handle it. His candid … More appraisal of the situation and how to proceed saved me thousands of dollars in legal fees. If you have a case requiring expertise in John's area of practice, look no further. Hire this man!
-
I had the opportunity to read an article that Mr. Floyd wrote and it was very interesting. I called him about the article and advice concerning a similar situation. He not only gave … More me excellent advice, he pointed out not just what I wanted to hear but what I needed to hear concerning my situation. The Good, The Bad and The ugly in a manner or speaking. He spoke with an open and honest heart with information to help me and not just to get a client.
-
If you are in trouble and need a lawyer, contact the John T. Floyd law firm. Some of the best lawyers in Texas work there! Understanding and helpful lawyers and staff that will do all … More they can to help you 😊
-
He gave me one of the most honest answers I have received in a very long time about any issue I was having with anything. Legal or not legal. I highly recommend giving him a call and … More will be referring him to friends and family if they have any issues in the future.Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism …More -
He took time out of his day to answer my legal questions and didn’t even charge me. I would definitely recommend him to you.
-
Gave free consultation on getting gun rights back. He truly cares about gun rights and getting you the help you deserve. 100% worth a callPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, … More Value …More -
Very professional, great quality work, and very friendly and helpful. Overall, their service is phenomenal. I recommend Mr. Floyd to anyone.
-
Mr. Floyd took the time to explain his experience with the law to me in layman's terms. Definitely give him a call.Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism …More -
He was honest , knowledgeable , and professional about what we talked about. Most lawyers are just about the money , but not john.Positive
Professionalism …More -
He was very truthful and honest with us very great man I would recommend him and we would use him again
-
Very professional honest and works hard currently working my husband’s appeal I pray he does his best workPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
I contacted John T. Floyd Law firm and I was very satisfied with service extremely helpful and friendly thank you Mr. FloydPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More … More -
This law frim was informative,great response time ,and the attorney called back not some secretary or legal assistant thank u guys for all your help wish it was more like youPositive … More
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
I would highly recommend Mr Floyd. He was very helpful and knowledge with a legal question I had.Positive
Professionalism …More -
He explained my case better then any other lawyerPositive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
Very informative
-
-
-
-
Had the pleasure speaking with John Floyd on a personal matter, he was very responsive, nothing but exceptional, and he really cares about you with sincerity and most importantly knows … More what is he talking about! No games or bs, his approach to my situation even though I knew it was probably way smaller then what he normally takes on, he was extremely helpful and didn't care about the size of the matter like other attorneys do. He really looked out for my best interests. You can tell he has decades of experience doing what he does just by chatting with him. I would highly recommend him.
-
Words can’t describe how grateful I am for working with John, he went above and beyond my expectation. I was wrongly accused and hired many lawyers before hiring John Floyd but they … More all disappointed me, I had lost hope until a friend of mine referred me to John. From the start he had my best interest in mind and gave helpful advice, he explained the process and guided me. He put more work and time than all my previous lawyers that cost me thousands of dollars. He was constantly communicating with court and defended me more than all lawyer i had hired before him. Don’t waste your time and money like I did, believe me when I say I hired countless lawyers before him and no one came close to John. I’m forever thankful for him for fighting for my innocence and getting my case dismissed. Thank you so much🙏🏼🙏🏼
-
I called Mr Floyd and left a message, with in the hour I received a call back with much more information then I could have ever expected. Mr Floyd was very informative on every question … More I had for him. He seemed like he cared, instead of like most attorneys that you talk to that are just out for a quick buck. If you want someone that is going to shoot strait with you, and has your best interest in hand, this is you guy. This was the best experience that I have ever had with an lawyer.
-
I can state with confidence that Mr. Floyd and his team are the most competent and professional lawyers one can hope for. My case was quite complex and I admit that as a law student … More I was not the most patient client. Mr. Floyd did a phenomenal job of managing the bench, prosecution and myself! The result was above expectation, and I will never hesitate to recommend this firm regardless of the caliber of the case at issue.
-
It was a pleasure working with Mr. Floyd. I contacted him regarding a legal matter and he was extremely knowledgeable about the law, and responded in a timely manner. I appreciated … More the fact I did not feel rushed, and he made sure he thoroughly answered all questions I had. I would highly recommend him!Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism …More -
Spoke with John Floyd about a 45 year old criminal case I was involved in. I had very little information about the case and John helped me search what records were available and gave … More me guidance to find more information. He was very professional and took his time helping me. I may need to hire a lawyer on this case and Mr. Floyd will be the man.Thanks John.
-
Very professional and straight forward. He's not going to waste your time or money. Very knowledgeable in a large range of possible matters one could face living in these days … More and times. If ever you need legal assistance, this is who I would suggest. Awesome!Positive
Responsiveness, Quality, Professionalism, Value …More -
I called about some legal questions I needed to get clarified and John was able to give me clarification and sound advice. I will definitely contact John for all future legal questions … More and issues.Thank you John!Positive
Responsiveness, Professionalism, Value …More -
Knows his stuff and well respected with DA and judges. I have referred him a couple times and every client has been satisfied
-
John is beyond knowledgeable! If I decide to pursue my case any further I would only have him represent me.
-
What a great attorney, this guy really took time out of his day to answer my questions and explain my case to me. Very grateful, thank you so muchPositive
Professionalism …More -
Absolutely a very professional lawyer. Very well read in the current law and more than willing to help if needed.
-
Mr. John he’s a professional he knows what he’s doing and he’s patient they recommend Him stronglyPositive
Professionalism …More -
Great service, very knowledgable and happy to help with any questions I had
-
Quick to action and helpful and knowledgeable with entertainment industry based issues!
-
Responded on a holiday week. Very knowledgeable and reassuring.
-
Very professional
-
-
-
-
I want to thank John T. Floyd and all of his team. He is the best lawyer who cares aboutHis clients and fights really hard to get the best outcome. He is a fighter and he is awesome!!!I … More recommend if any one needs criminal defense , he is the BEST. We had a really serious caseAnd we are very thankful for the outcome. Thank you John!!!!! God bless you!!!!!!
-
The attorneys at John T. Floyd Law Firm work diligently to achieve the best possible results for their clients. They are caring and knowledgeable professionals. Their expertise in the … More law and their experience as trial attorneys makes them the right choice as a defense attorney. I recommend this law firm highly.
-
From beginning to end this firm handled my case like the top tier professionals they are. I would not trust ANYONE else with my legal needs after having less than stellar experiences … More with other teams. Thank you Floyd!!!
-
I really felt like the team cared about my case and am super satisfied with the outcome. Would not recommend anyone else!
-
These guys do amazing work and have phenomenal service! Hands down best in the Houston area!!
-
John and Chris are true professionals! Love those guys like family!
-
Mr. Floyd and his team are very knowledgeable, informative, and helpful.
-
A team you can depend on to stand up and fight for you to prove the truth the whole truth!
-
-
Mr. John T. Floyd represented me.I couldn't be happier with the outcome he managed to achieve on an VERY Important case that was dismissed the day of Trial. He is patient & … More very knowledgeable of the legal system. I HIGHLY recommend him to anyone in need of a lawyer!John, I am forever grateful & satisfied with the effort you put forth & all you did for me. Thank you isn't enough!God bless you & your family!
-
The John T. Floyd Law Firm assisted me, and I can tell you that the attorney took the time to answer my questions, and I didn't feel rushed or dismissed as I have experienced in … More the past with attorneys. The attorney was very nice and extremely knowledgeable. Initial impressions and continued excellent customer service are big factors for me and as such I would highly recommend this firm.
-
I thank you for your efforts to help Felons regain their Civil rights, and for the information on possession , I am A convicted Felon, no violent history. I am an expert shot, I am … More 76 yoa, and very concerned about the present lake of Security in our State and Country. God Bless and Prosper you in your efforts, Your friend, Sonny Bivens
-
I really appreciated both Chris and John helping with my legal questions and concerns. Both are good guys and I would not hesitate to recommend them.
-
Extremely helpful!!! Helping me understand the law.
John T. Floyd is Board Certified in Criminal Law By the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Request A Confidential Consultation
Fields marked with an * are required
"*" indicates required fields
Copyright © 2024 John T. Floyd Law Firm • All rights reserved.
Designed & Developed by
