Blog
THE RIGHT TO AN IMPARTIAL TRIAL STRUCK WITH CRITICAL BLOW
Failure to Strike Prosecutor, Victim of Sex Crime, from Jury not Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees every criminal defendant a right to an impartial trial.1/Selecting a jury of twelve men and women to hear a criminal case is perhaps the most critical stage in the trial process where a defense attorney must provide effective representation. He has a pool of prospective jurors representing a cross-section of the community from which to select the people who will hear the facts and fairly consider the case. This jury pool is a minefield of human experiences that range from concealed bias and prejudice to open fairness and impartiality. The task of the defense attorney is to navigate through the minefield without exploding a mine that will injure his client’s opportunity for an impartial trial.
The constitutional guarantee of an impartial trial, in all actuality, begins with voir dire—a French term meaning “to speak the truth.” Voir dire is a pre-jury selection phase of the trial during which the prosecution and defense are afforded an opportunity, under the strict supervision of the trial judge, to question prospective jurors to determine if they are qualified and suitable to serve on a jury. These questions are often initially influenced by the questionnaires prospective jurors are required to fill out before the voir dire gets underway.
Texas criminal procedure grants ten peremptory challenges—the right of either party to exclude a potential juror for any reason or no reason at all so long as the challenge is not use to discriminate on the basis of race, gender, or ethnicity—to both the prosecution and the defense in non-capital felony cases and capital cases in which the State does not seek the death penalty. If two or more defendants are jointly tried, each defendant and the prosecution are entitled to six peremptory challenges.2/
A defense attorney must utilize these peremptory challenges in a judicious manner. They are generally exercised when the attorney detects, either through direct responses from the prospective juror to specific questions or from mere instinct honed by years of trial practice, that a prospective juror is biased in a very specific sense or harbors prejudices in a general sense against particular defendants. And a defense attorney in Texas does not have a lot of time to make these calls. Most judges impose very restrictive time frames for completing the voir dire examination—ranging from twenty minutes to an hour. It is critical, therefore, that an attorney be thoroughly prepared before he/she enters the jury selection arena.
El Paso attorneys C. Roberts and A. Lugo learned this lesson the hard way in the case of David Morales. Morales was arrested in June 1996 for one count of aggravated sexual assault of a child and one count of indecency with a child. The six-year-old child was visiting Morales” home to attend a Holy Communion celebration when the alleged inappropriate sexual contacts occurred.3/Roberts and Lugo were Morales’ trial attorneys. The defendant was convicted of both offenses and the jury assessed his punishment at 35 years for the aggravated sexual assault offense and 20 years for the indecency with a child offense.
At the time of Morales’ trial, Roberts had been practicing law for thirty years and had more than ample experience in the voir dire process. Lugo, on the other hand, was not so experienced. She had been practicing law for about seven years at the time of Morales’ trial and was not familiar with voir dire. For whatever reason, neither attorney was effectively prepared to handle the voir dire examination in the Morales case, and their lack of preparation probably contributed significantly to a jury being selected that was prone to convict. Honorably, both lawyers would later admit as much in a valiant attempt to set the record straight.
R. Wyatt was an assistant district attorney in the El Paso County District Attorney’s Office at the time of Morales’ trial. She was in the jury pool of prospective jurors summoned to court to try the Morales case. All the parties involved in the case knew she was a prosecutor in the D.A.’s office—the defense attorneys, the trial judge, and, of course, the prosecutor handling the case.
Each prospective juror was required to fill out a questionnaire designed to determine if they were in any way connected with the case or had ever been a victim of a crime or held any bias in the case they had been summoned to hear. As a matter of course, defense attorneys scour these questionnaires for any scent of a potential problem—a search for legitimate reasons to exclude a potential juror as being unqualified, not suitable, or who may have an implied bias. Wyatt answered on her questionnaire that she was an assistant district attorney, but, even more significantly, she stated she had been the victim of numerous crimes (including sex crimes), her father had been a police officer for 33 years, and she had “many, many friends” in law enforcement.4/Neither Roberts nor Lugo read Wyatt’s questionnaire prior to voir dire.
Attorney Roberts, however, did challenge Wyatt for cause pursuant to Article 35.16 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. This statute lists eleven specific reasons why a defense attorney may challenge a prospective juror for cause. One of the enumerated reasons is: “That the juror has a bias or prejudice in favor of or against the defendant.”5/Article 35.16 recognizes what is known as the “implied bias doctrine.” This doctrine assumes bias in certain prospective jurors; for example, a juror who “is related within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity … to any prosecutor in the case.”6/Article 35.16, however, does not automatically imply bias against an assistant district attorney in the same office prosecuting the defendant.7/
Attorney Roberts based his challenge for cause against Wyatt on the specific premise that, as a member of the District Attorney’s Office prosecuting the case, was a party to the case and, therefore, disqualified to serve on the jury under Article 35.16.8/The problem with that challenge is that Article 35.16 does not specifically list Roberts’ reason for the challenge as a basis for juror exclusion. And a challenge for cause made under the “implied bias doctrine” requires as showing that a prospective juror is actually biased as a “matter of law.”9/
At the time attorney Roberts challenged Wyatt for cause he had only two peremptory challenges left, and he wanted to use them to strike two other venirepersons with whom he had problems. Once trial judge Sam Medrano, Jr. denied Roberts’ challenge for cause against Wyatt (because the attorney had not demonstrated actual bias as a matter of law), Roberts was faced with a decision of whether to use one of his two remaining peremptory strikes against Wyatt or use them against the other two problem venirepersons. He chose to use them against the other two jurors and accept Wyatt because he believed the prosecutor to be fair and was more comfortable with her on the jury than the other two jurors.10/
It proved to be a horrific tactical blunder. At this juncture neither he nor Lugo had read Wyatt’s questionnaire. Both attorneys had assumed the prosecutor would be excluded for cause; and if accepted for jury service, would be fair. Neither attorney was effectively prepared to demonstrate implied bias as a matter of law required under Article 35.16 because they had not read Wyatt’s questionnaire containing admissions that she had been a victim of numerous crimes, including sex crimes; that she was the daughter of a law enforcement officer; and that she had many friends in the law enforcement community.
Roberts and Lugo also made a significant procedural blunder at this juncture in the trial; they did not properly preserve for appeal Judge Medrano’s decision not to grant their challenge for cause of Wyatt.To preserve this issue for appeal, Roberts and Lugo were required to:1) make a clear and specific challenge for cause; 2) use a peremptory strike on the complained-of venireperson; 3) exhaust all their peremptory strikes; 4) request additional strikes; 5) identify an objectionable juror; and 6) claim that they would have struck the objectionable juror with the peremptory strike if they had one to use.The fact that Roberts and Lugo did not use one of their two remaining peremptory strikes on Wyatt failed to preserve Judge Medrano’s decision for appellate review.11/
Following his conviction, Morales filed a motion for a new trial alleging jury misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel based on Roberts and Lugo’s handling of the voir dire process. At a hearing on this motion, Roberts provided the following testimony:
- He had been practicing law for 33 years
- He was familiar with the procedure for preserving error when a challenge for cause has been denied and, in fact, had utilized the procedure many times
- He should have used a peremptory challenge on Robyn Wyatt and requested additional strikes for the other two problem prospective jurors
- His decision to leave Wyatt on the jury had been made in a vacuum because he had made the mistake of not reading her questionnaire until after the guilty verdict had been rendered
- Had he known Wyatt had been the victim of a sex crime, that her father had been a police officer, and that she had many friends in law enforcement, he would not have made the decision to leave her on the jury
- He had “assumed” that his co-counsel, Lugo, had read the Wyatt questionnaire
- His decision to leave Wyatt on the jury was not a “strategic” one
- He believed that any decision by a defense attorney to leave “a lawyer for the State” on a criminal jury isper seineffective assistance of counsel.12/
Attorney Lugo provided the following testimony at the hearing:
- She had been practicing law for about seven years.
- She acted as co-counsel in Morales’ defense.
- She was present during the voir dire process.
- She knew attorney Roberts’ challenge for cause against Wyatt had been denied.
- She was not familiar with the procedure for preserving error on a denial of a challenge for cause.
- She had seen Wyatt’s name on the juror sheet the night before the trial and knew she was a prosecutor.
- She did not read Wyatt’s questionnaire she “assumed” the defense team would strike the prosecutor for cause.
- The first time she read Wyatt’s questionnaire was after a verdict had been rendered on punishment against Morales.
- There was no “strategic reason” for leaving Wyatt on the jury.
- She believed the decision to leave Wyatt on the jury was “grossly ineffective assistance because the error caused the verdict of guilt and punishment.”
- She believed that she should have “insisted” that Wyatt be peremptorily challenged rather than deferring to Roberts’ “impromptu decision” not to so strike her.
- She had made an error by not reading Wyatt’s questionnaire so she could have pointed out to Roberts about the prosecutor’s previous sexual victimization.13/
Judge Medrano offered the following testimony at the hearing:
- That by the time the Morales case reached the jury, everyone in the courthouse was aware that a prosecutor was on the jury.
- That an attorney in preparing for the voir dire process is supposed to read the juror questionnaires and that an attorney who fails to do so is not properly prepared.
- He opined that the only way he would leave either a prosecutor or a defense attorney on a jury was if he knew the person very, very well or had a friendship with the person.
- Based on Wyatt’s questionnaire, Judge Medrano said he would only leave someone like her on the jury if he had some “personal insight” into her not included in the questionnaire.14/
Prevented by procedural bars from directly addressing the implied bias doctrine issue under Article 35.16, the Eighth District Court of Appeals, sitting in El Paso, elected to address the issue of whether Roberts and Lugo had failed to provide Morales with effective representation. An ineffective assistance of counsel claim is established only when (1) a defense attorney’s performance falls below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) there is a reasonable probability that but for counsel’s deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different.15/
The appeals court had an ample record from the motion for new trial hearing that clearly established both Roberts and Lugo had been significantly deficient during the voir dire process. But that did not end the court’s legal analysis; it had to clearly find that Morales had been prejudiced by his attorneys’ deficient performance. That was no minor hurdle because the U.S. Supreme Court has never explicitly adopted or rejected the implied bias doctrine upon which the ineffective assistance claimed hinged.16/
The appeals court, however, found persuasive legal authority in a 35-year-old concurring opinion by former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor which provided a list of examples that would warrant the application of the implied bias doctrine to prevent a miscarriage of justice. “Some of these examples might include the revelation that the juror is an actual employee of the prosecuting agency,” Justice O’Connor wrote. She added that the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury “should not allow a verdict to stand under such circumstances.”17/
The appeals court found that the Morales case presented “the very ‘extreme’ situation which gave Justice O’Connor such grave concern.”18/Against this backdrop, the appeals court elected to reverse Morales’ conviction based on the following succinct conclusion:
“ … While venireperson Wyatt may have believed she could set aside her status as an employee of the prosecuting agency, even a well-meaning person would find it difficult to remain impartial under such circumstances and most likely would be unconsciously blinded by otherwise good intentions. It is fair to say that venireperson Wyatt may believe herself to be fair and impartial, but nevertheless she should have been disqualified in the interest of justice. It is of fundamental importance that ‘[J]ustice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.’ Because venireperson Wyatt was disqualified from serving as a juror for her implied bias as a matter of law, [Roberts and Lugo] rendered wholly deficient performance by failing to preserve the error of the denial for [Roberts’] challenge for cause. Further, we find that [Roberts and Lugo] deficient performance resulted in a trial before a partial jury, which prejudiced the defense.”19/
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, acting on a request for discretionary review by the State, disagreed with the appeals court conclusion. After a comprehensive analysis of the implied bias doctrine and its potential Sixth Amendment implications, the CCA held that “we need not decide whether theSixth Amendmentembraces the doctrine of implied bias; nor do we need to decide whether, as Justice O’Connor believes, the implied bias doctrine would require the exclusion from the jury service of a prospective juror who is an employee of the prosecuting agency, as Wyatt was. In our view, even assuming that the answer to both questions were affirmative, that does not mean that the [Morales’] trial counsel could not have made a legitimate tactical decision not to exercise a peremptory challenge in order to preserve the trial court’s error in overruling his challenge for cause for appeal.”20/
This “view” was in direct conflict with the views expressed by both Roberts and Lugo at the motion for new trial hearing when they testified under oath that their decision not to use a peremptory challenge to strike Wyatt was not a “strategic” decision. The attorneys specifically testified that the decision not to strike Wyatt was made in a “vacuum,” and, according to both of them, amounted to ineffective assistance. The CCA, however, was determined to insert its own view as to what constitutes either a tactical or strategic decision under the fact situation of the Morales case:
“We hold that, if the exigencies of trial call upon trial counsel to make a difficult choice between exercising a scarce peremptory challenge to preserve such an error for appeal, on the one hand, and exercising that peremptory challenge for some other purpose in order to secure a perceived advantage at trial, on the other, it does not violate the defendant’sSixth Amendmentright to the effective assistance of counsel for trial counsel to opt for the latter.”21/
This holding completely disregards the true “facts” of the Morales case—so much so that it exemplifies the classic “miscarriage of justice” all judges have a sworn duty to prevent. Neither Roberts nor Lugo said they faced a “difficult choice” in deciding whether to strike Wyatt, and neither attorney said they elected to keep Wyatt on the jury “in order to secure a perceived advantage at trial.” Neither attorney had even read Wyatt’s questionnaire; therefore, their decision to leave her on the jury was truly made in a “vacuum.” Both attorneys admitted that had they been functioning as competent advocates for Morales, they would have read Wyatt’s questionnaire and immediately realized there was no earthly way they could let her sit on the jury. Even Judge Medrano said an attorney who has not read the questionnaires of prospective jurors before the voir dire process is not “properly prepared”—and that in his opinion a prosecutor should always be struck from jury service absent some extraordinary insight into the individual by the attorney.
In its final conclusion, the CCA held that “ … even if it is appropriate to regard Wyatt as impliedly biased under theSixthAmendment, that does notipso factoestablish that trial counsel could not make a legitimate decision to keep her on [Morales’] jury.”22/
There was nothing remotely “legitimate” about Roberts and Lugo’s decision to keep Wyatt on the jury. The attorneys honorably conceded as much. Judge Medrano, as well as the courts of appeals, agreed with the attorneys. So for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to color the facts of the case in order to create some legitimacy for Roberts/Lugo decision to keep Wyatt on the jury not only defies the case law governing ineffective assistance of counsel but the normal rules of human logic as well.
SOURCES:
1/Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968)
2/Tex.Code Crim. Proc.Art. 35.15(b)
3/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d 731 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2007)
4/Morales v. State, 253 S.W.3d 686 (Tex.Crim.App. 2008)
5/Tex.Code Crim. Proc. art. 35.16(a)(9)
6/Tex.Code Crim. Proc. art. 35.16(c)(1)
7/Morales v. State, 253 S.W.3d at 693
8/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d at 732
9/Morales v. State, 253 S.W.3d at 691
10/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d at 734
11/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d at 733
12/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d at 734; 253 S.W.3d at 690
13/Id.
14/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d at 735
15/Strickland v. Washington, 446 U.S. 668 (1984)
16/Ruckman v. State, 109 S.W.3d 524 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2000, pet. ref’d)
17/Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209 (1982)
18/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d at 735
19/Morales v. State, 217 S.W.3d at 736
20/Morales v. State, 253 S.W.3d at 696
21/Id.
22/Morales v. State, 253 S.W.3d at 698-99
By: Houston Criminal Lawyer 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
