Blog
IS LARRY RAY SWEARINGEN GUILTY OF CAPITAL MURDER?
Actual Innocence Not Recognized Ground for Relief in Federal Habeas Corpus Jurisprudence
By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Is Larry Ray Swearingen guilty of capital murder? The State of Texas, through Montgomery County Assistant District Attorney Marc Brumberger, believes that he is. The parents of Melissa Trotter, Charles and Sandra Trotter, believe that he is. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals believes that he is.
But Swearingen’s attorney, James Rytting, the New York-based Innocence Project, and a host of forensic pathologists, including Glenn Larkin, strenuously believe that he is not. As Larkin recently told Texas Monthly Magazine: “no rational and intellectually honest person can look at the evidence and conclude Larry Swearingen is guilty of this horrible crime.” While the Houston Chronicle, in a January 23, 2009 editorial, did not go as far as Larkin, the respected editorial board of the newspaper said: “He may not be a saint, but Swearingen does not deserve to die for someone else’s crime.”
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is not concerned one way or the other about Swearingen’s guilt or innocence. The appeals court has long held that the execution of an inmate who has demonstrated “actual innocence” does not offend federal due process of law. The appeals court, however, recently stayed Swearingen’s pending execution and ordered a hearing to determine (1) if state prosecutors engaged in prosecutorial misconduct and (2) if he was adequately represented at trial by defense counsel. See: In Re: Larry Ray Swearingen, No. 09-20024, Jan. 26, 2009 [Online citation unavailable].
We cannot conclude whether Swearingen is innocent or guilty. Our intent is to lay out the legal and factual background of his case so our readers can draw their own conclusions based upon the evidence we’ve gleaned from the public record and court decisions.
LEGAL BACKGROUND
Larry Ray Swearingen, an electrician who lived in Willis, Texas, was arrested on December 11, 1998 by Montgomery County law enforcement authorities on outstanding charges unrelated to the murder of Melissa Trotter.
The body of Melissa Trotter was found on January 2, 1999 in the Sam Houston National Forest.
Swearingen was subsequently indicted by a Montgomery County grand jury for capital murder pursuant to Tex. Penal Code, Art. 19.03(a)(2)—a murder committed during the commission or attempted commission of either (1) a kidnapping or (2) an aggravated sexual assault.
A Montgomery County jury convicted Swearingen on July 11, 2000 and assessed his punishment at death.
Swearingen filed a mandatory direct appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. That appeal was denied on March 26, 2003. See: Swearingen v. State, 101 S.W.3d 89 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003).
While his direct appeal was pending, Swearingen on March 11, 2002 filed his first state habeas corpus application. He raised ten claims for relief. The court of criminal appeals directed the trial court to make factual findings and legal conclusions on the writ application. The trial court heard, and rejected, Swearingen’s claims. The appeals court adopted the trial court’s ruling on May 21, 2003. See: Ex Parte Swearingen, No. WR-53,613-01 [Online citation unavailable].
On May 21, 2004, Swearingen filed his first federal writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas. He argued that there had been insufficient evidence presented at his state trial that he killed Melissa Trotter during the commission or attempted commission of either a kidnapping or a sexual assault. The district court denied habeas relief but issued a certificate of appealability authorizing Swearingen to appeal to the Fifth Circuit. Swearingen appealed to the Fifth Circuit raising the insufficiency of evidence claim and putting the appeals court on notice that he intended to file a future “actual innocence” claim. The Fifth Circuit was not impressed by either issue. Only July 31, 2006, the court denied the habeas claim and warned Swearingen’s counsel that if he intended to file an “actual innocence” claim, he should do so promptly. See: Swearingen v. Quarterman, 192 Fed. Appx. 300 (5th Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1216, 127 S.C.
1269, 167 L.Ed.2d 93 (2007).
While the federal habeas proceedings were pending, Swearingen filed motions in state court in the fall of 2004 seeking DNA testing of certain evidence and requesting an evidentiary hearing on the matter. The trial court denied these motions in April 2005. Swearingen appealed this decision to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. That court upheld the trial court ruling on February 1, 2006. See: Swearingen v. State, 189 S.W.3d 779 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006).
In January 2007, Swearingen filed his second state application for writ of habeas corpus. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals determined that the trial court should enter factual findings and legal conclusions on six of the claims presented the habeas application. The trial court heard, and rejected, all six claims, and the court of criminal appeals adopted the trial court’s ruling on January 16, 2008. See: Ex Parte Swearingen, 2008 Tex. Crim. App. Unpub. LEXIS 17 (2008).
On January 16, 2008, Swearingen filed his third state application for writ of habeas corpus raising another six claims for relief. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on March 5, 2008 found that four of the claims were an “abuse of the writ” but remanded two of the claims to the trial court for factual findings and legal conclusions. The two claims dealt with whether the state had withheld exculpatory evidence and sponsored perjured testimony. See: Ex Parte Swearingen, 2008 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 169 (2008).
The trial court heard, and rejected, the two claims dealing with prosecutorial misconduct, and the court of criminal appeals adopted the trial court’s ruling on December 17, 2008. See: Ex Parte Swearingen, 2008 Tex. Crim. App. Unpub. LEXIS 948 (2008), pet. for cert. filed (U.S. Jan. 14, 2009).
Facing a January 27, 2009 scheduled execution, Swearingen on January 14, 2009, filed motions in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for leave to file a second federal petition with the court and for a stay of his pending execution. He raised seven claims for relief in these motions, including the “actual innocence” claim. The appeals court on January 26, 2009 granted the motions with respect to two of the claims: 1) whether the state sponsored perjured testimony and 2) whether Swearingen had been denied effective assistance of counsel. See: In Re: Larry Ray Swearingen, No. 09-20024 [Online citation unavailable].
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Larry Ray Swearingen apparently met Melissa Trotter on Sunday, December 6, 1998, in Montgomery County. They chatted at some length. Swearingen managed to get Melissa’s telephone number. They made plans to see or talk with each other the next day. Swearingen bragged to co-workers that he would be taking Melissa lunch. But Melissa did not show up for the meeting. Swearingen explained to his co-workers that he had called Melissa and learned she had to take a test. They did not believe him. They teased him about being “stood up” by Melissa. Swearingen was reportedly angry the rest of the day.
On the evening of December 7 Swearingen transported some furniture in his red pickup truck. He was accompanied by two acquaintances, Bryan Foster and William Brown. Swearingen told Foster and Brown that he was going to meet Melissa the next day – and if everything went okay, they would have lunch together. Later that evening at Foster’s house Swearingen called Melissa and talked about meeting her for lunch and helping her study for an exam.
The following day, December 8, Swearingen met Melissa at approximately 1:30 p.m. at the Montgomery College library in Conroe. Melissa was eating tater-tots she had purchased from the school’s cafeteria. The couple sat around a computer chatting amicably before leaving the library together at around 2:00 p.m.
Melissa’s vehicle remained the college parking lot.
Five minutes after exiting the library, Swearingen returned a page he had received. He told the calling party he would call back later because he was having lunch with a friend.
Swearingen returned to his trailer and left sometime between 2:00 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. He returned again to the trailer sometime before 5:30 p.m. He asked his landlord some questions before leaving again to pick up his wife, Terry, from her mother’s house. This time period was uncertain but was placed at sometime between 4:30 and 5:30 p.m. A neighbor saw Swearingen’s truck coming and going that afternoon but could not see who got in or out of the vehicle because of its tinted windows.
When Swearingen returned home with his wife, she noticed a pack of Marlboro Light cigarettes and a red lighter on top of the television. The items caught her attention because neither she nor Swearingen smoked. But evidence revealed that Melissa smoked Marlboro lights.
Later, during the evening of December 8, Swearingen called a former girlfriend named Phyllis Morrison and told her that he was in trouble. He said the police might be after him.
Swearingen was arrested on December 11 in connection with several outstanding warrants unrelated to the Melissa Trotter case. While being handcuffed, he told the police that his wrists and ribs were sore from a bar fight he had been a week earlier.
Melissa Trotter’s body was found in the Sam Houston National Forest on January 2, 1999. A piece of hosiery, still tied as a ligature, was around her neck. The body was on its back in a pile of bushes. Her right arm was above her head and slightly to the left. Her top and bra had been pulled up under her arms, leaving her breasts and back exposed. The body had creases running from the neck to the waist, probably caused by lying on the pile of bushes. Melissa had on jeans at the time of her death. The pants were open but the fly was closed. A right rear pocket had been torn downward, exposing part of her buttocks and red underwear. There were no scratches on the body’s exposed skin which indicated she had not been dragged to the spot where the body was found. She had on one shoe, and the other lay nearby. There was no soil on the shoes, indicating she had not walked to that location in the forest.
The location of Melissa’s body was in a heavily wooded, secluded, and remote area. The police had searched the area three times before without finding a body. One had to be within 20 feet of the body to see it.
Swearingen was familiar with this area. He had previously driven a date around this forest area a few months earlier in his pickup.
An autopsy revealed Melissa had died from asphyxia due to lacked of oxygen caused by ligature strangulation. The nylon ligature was cut from a pair of the pantyhose. The matching portion of the pantyhose was found in Swearingen’s trailer during a police search. However, two previous law enforcement searches had failed to discover the matching pantyhose. The New York Innocence Project is currently trying to obtain DNA testing of the matching pantyhose.
The autopsy also revealed a sharp-forced injury on Melissa’s neck that had been inflicted before she died and while her blood continued to flow. This area of injury also had animal tooth marks and activity around it.
There were no defensive wounds, such as broken fingernails, on the body. This suggested the nylon ligature had been tied around Melissa’s neck after she was unconscious. This suggestion was premised on the theory that a struggling Melissa would have fought hard against attempts to wrap the nylon ligature around her neck and caused defensive wounds.
Despite the body’s advanced stage of decomposition, the autopsy revealed that the left side of Melissa face was much darker than the other side. The report concluded this darken area had been caused by a bruise to that side of the face, indicating she had been struck in the face before her death.
The autopsy also revealed a deep bruise on Melissa’ tongue. The report concluded this bruise had probably been caused by a bite or a cut. This conclusion was premised on the theory that a blow under the chin would have pushed the lower jaw up onto the tongue, or that Melissa had bitten down on her tongue while being strangled.
The autopsy further revealed discoloration on Melissa’ vaginal wall. The report concluded this bruising could have been caused by sexual intercourse on the day prior to her death.
Fibers were removed from Melissa’s body. These fibers were similar to fibers found on Swearingen’s jacket, on the seat and headliner in his truck, and on the carpet in the master bedroom of his trailer. Fibers found in Swearingen’s truck were also similar to fibers found on Melissa’s jacket.
There were hairs found in Swearingen’s truck that appeared to have been forcibly removed from Melissa’s head.
The contents of Melissa’s stomach revealed what appeared to be some form of potato, chicken, and a small amount of greenish vegetable material. These contents indicated Melissa had eaten a recent meal before her death. It was clearly established that she had lunch with Swearingen on December 8.
While in jail, Swearingen reportedly sent a letter written in Spanish to his mother. Swearingen had used an English-Spanish dictionary to compose the letter and gotten a cellmate to copy it. The letter, purportedly written by someone named “Robin” and addressed to “Larry,” stated someone other than Swearingen killed Melissa. The translated letter read:
”I have information that I need to tell you about Melissa and Wanda. I was with the murderer of Melissa, and with the one that took Wanda from work. I am not sure what he did with Wanda, but I saw everything that happened to Melissa. He was talking to her in the parking lot. They went to school together is what he told me. “We drove for awhile, and then we went and had breakfast. I began to talk about sex when she said she had to go home.” He hit her in the left eye, and she fell to the floor of her car. He took her to the wood and began to choke her with his hands at first, then he jerked (jalar is slang) her to the bushes. He cut her throat to make sure that she was dead. Her shoe came off when he jerked (slang) her into the bushes. Her jabear (cannot make out/ no such word in Spanish) was torn. I am in love with him, and I don’t want him in jail.
The man in jail doesn’t deserve to be in jail, either. To make sure that you know, I am telling you the truth. She was wearing red panties when R.D. murdered her. He choked her with his hands first, but he used A piece of rope the truck from his truck; he had a piece of black rope that he used in his boat to anchor it, or something, he said. When he dragged her from the car, he put her in the shrub on her back. I know that I should turn him in, but he told me that he would kill me, too, and I believe him. He has told about this murder to 3 other women in the past, will tell you that he smokes, and he smoked with her at the college at 2:30 and drove a blue truck. His hair is blonde and brown and lives here. His name is Ronnie, but that is all I can tell, if you want more information, say it on paper and I will continue to write, but I want to come in.”
See: Swearingen v. State, supra, at 92-95.
THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE AGAINST SWEARINGEN
At best, the evidence against Larry Ray Swearingen was circumstantial. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on direct appeal conceded at much. The state’s highest appeals court pointed out that the forensic evidence was “inconclusive” and the expert witnesses could not conclude that any one given explanation on this evidence was more likely than any other. For example, the experts could not positively state that there was a bruise or a knife wound on Melissa’s body, or that she had been unconscious when the ligature was applied. As for Swearingen’s fabricated Spanish letter, the court said it was not a “confession” and the jury could view it any way it wanted. The court, however, did point out that while the letter contained information inconsistent with the rest of the evidence, it stated information consistent with the “undisputed facts” of the case such as the cause of death, location of the body, and the color of Melissa’s underwear. The letter also supported the State’s theory that it was Melissa’s rejection of Swearingen’s sexual advances that “began the cycle of violence that led to her death.” Swearingen v. State, supra, at 96-97.
Based on the circumstantial evidence, and its reservations about it, the appeals court nonetheless found that:
“ … a rational jury could have concluded that: Trotter left the college with Swearingen in his truck. After she ate some chicken and green vegetables, he made sexual advances which she rejected. This rejection upset him and he hit her on the left side of her face. Then, through the use of the force or intimidation created by having hit her, he restrained her and substantially interfered with her liberty by confining her in his truck while moving her to the forest without her consent and that he did so with the intent to prevent her liberation by either secreting her in a place where she was not likely to be found or by using or threatening to use deadly force.
”A rational jury could also have concluded that at some point during the restraint, knowing that Trotter was unconscious or physically unable to resist, Swearingen intentionally committed acts in furtherance of his intent to have sexual relations with her, such as pulling up her bra and possibly penetrating her vagina. A rational jury could conclude that Swearingen compelled Trotter to submit or participate in such action by the use of physical force and without Trotter’s consent, as indicated by Trotter’s statement that she needed to go home when the conversation turned to sex. A rational jury could then find that Swearingen did attempt to, and succeeded in causing Trotter’s death in the course of the same criminal episode.” Id., at 96.
ACTUAL INNOCENCE CLAIM
Since his conviction, Swearingen has secured testimony from at least three current and former Chief Medical Examiners and another forensic pathologist who have concluded that Melissa Trotter’s body had been in the woods no less than 3 and no more than 15 days before it was discovered on January 2, 1999. Dr. Glenn Larkin said Melissa’s body had been in the woods and deceased no more than 3 to 4 days. Dr. Louis Sanchez concluded the body had been in the woods for 10 to 15 days but was “some place else before that.” Dr. James Arends, an entomologist, stated that the body was “stored someplace cold” [“frozen”) before being placed in the woods based on different decomposition of the body from one end to the other. Finally, and more recently, Dr. Lloyd White concluded Melissa had been dead no more than two or three days when her body was found.
This post-conviction forensic evidence is bolstered by an October 31, 2007 affidavit from former Harris County Chief Medical Examiner Joyce Carter, who testified at Swearingen’s trial that Melissa’s body had been in the forest for approximately 25 days. Carter’s testimony supported the State’s theory that Swearingen killed Melissa on December 8 and dumped her body in the forest that same day. Dr. Carter’s 2007 affidavit states she re-examined the autopsy evidence and changed her opinion. She states that had she been given additional forensic evidence that was not available to her prior to trial, she would have concluded that Melissa’s body had been in the forest no more than 14 days.
Since Swearingen was arrested on December 11, 1998 and in jail at the time these forensic experts state Melissa’s body was deposited in the Sam Houston State Forest, his attorney and the New York Innocence Project argue these experts make a compelling case of Swearingen’s “actual innocence.”
In granting the stay of execution, two judges of the Fifth Circuit panel were not so convinced and were actually dismissive of the “actual innocence” claim presented by Swearingen’s experts – both from a factual and constitutional perspective. Judges Jones and DeMoss at the outset pointed out that the Fifth Circuit “does not recognize freestanding claims of actual innocence on federal habeas review.” In Re: Swearingen, p. 6 (Slip Opinion) [citing Graves v. Cockrell, 351 F.3d 143, 151 (5th Cir. 2003)].
As for the new forensic evidence, the judges took particular pains to stress that while each expert shared the opinion that Melissa’s body was not placed in the forest on December 8, 1998, the differences in their opinions as to how long her body had been in the forest before it was discovered “undermine[d] the credibility of their conclusions.” The refusal of these two judges to give credibility to the new forensic evidence was bolstered by the state’s post-conviction “entornological evidence” that Melissa’s body had actually been “colonized by the fly Cynomyopsis Cadavarina, a secondary colonizer, on December 8, 1998,” supporting its theory that her body had been placed in the forest that day. Finally, the judges noted that there was no expert testimony that weakened the link between the contents of Melissa’s stomach and the meal she had eaten with Swearingen on December 8, 1998. Id., at p. 6, n. 6.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL DILEMMA POSED BY SWEARINGEN
In a concurring opinion, Fifth Circuit Judge Jacques L. Wiener, Jr. articulated a constitutional dilemma posed by the Swearingen case. Judge Wiener stated:
“Although my concurrence in the foregoing opinion makes it unanimous, I write separately to address the elephant that I perceive in the corner of this room: actual innocence. Consistently repeating the mantra that, to date, the Supreme Court of the United States has never expressly recognized actual innocence as a basis for habeas corpus relief in a death penalty case, this court has uniformly rejected standalone claims of actual innocence as a constitutional ground for prohibiting the imposition of the death penalty. The Supreme Court has, however, made statements in dicta which at least h6ly signal that, under the right circumstances, it might add those capital defendants who are actually innocent to the lists of person who—like the insane, the mentally retarded, and the very young—are constitutionally ineligible for the death penalty.
“I conceive the real possibility that the district court to which we return this case today could view the newly discovered medical expert reports as clear and convincing evidence that the victim in this case could not possibly have been killed by the defendant, yet find it impossible to force the actual-innocence camel through the eye of either the Giglio [prosecutorial misconduct] or the Strickland [ineffective assistance] needle, and thus have no choice but to deny habeas relief to an actually innocent person. Should that prove to be so, this might be the very case for this court en banc—or the U.S. Supreme Court if we should demur—to recognize actual innocence as a ground for federal habeas relief. To me, this question is a brooding omnipresence in capital habeas jurisprudence that has been left unanswered for too long.” Id., at p. 10-11 (Slip Opinion).
Judge Wiener’s concurring opinion points out that under current federal habeas jurisprudence a condemned inmate who is actually innocent can be legally executed by the states absent a violation of a constitutional right clearly recognized by the United States Supreme Court. Put simply, a guilty condemned inmate with constitutional violations is entitled to a new trial while an innocent condemned inmate with no constitutional violations is not. That’s more than an “elephant in the room.” It’s ludicrous.
CONCLUSION
As we stated at the outset, we do not have enough information to draw a firm conclusion on Swearingen’s guilt or innocence. It is difficult to see the conflicting conclusions drawn by the medical experts as a “silver bullet” of innocence when compared to the indisputable evidence that Swearingen was the last person seen with Melissa while she was still alive and that he was aware of the undisclosed “red underwear” evidence as he stated in his fabricated Spanish letter. Neither sets of evidence—one favoring innocence, the other guilt—is “compelling” enough for us to draw a firm line in the sand on either issue.
However, we join with the Chronicle editorial that there has been enough “clear and convincing” medical evidence produced since Swearingen’s conviction to warrant further forensic testing and to prevent the condemned inmate’s execution. No one should be executed when doubts about guilt/innocence clutter the decision-making process.
By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
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
