Dothan Attorney Arrested on Theft Charges
Frederick McNab, a 52-year-old former Dothan attorney, finds himself back in trouble with authorities after allegedly stealing nearly $2 million from three different people. McNab was arrested and charged last Friday with 14 felony counts of first-degree theft of property, one felony count of second-degree theft of property, and one misdemeanor count of third-degree theft of property. These new charges bring the total number of felony theft indictments against McNab to twelve, and the total number of theft charges to twenty-five. The amount allegedly stolen by McNab in these theft cases now totals over $4 million.
Houston County Sheriff’s deputies first arrested McNab two days prior to Christmas after a grand jury returned multiple felony indictments against him alleging offenses of theft by deception. McNab posted bail totaling $812,500 shortly after his arrest.
McNab is scheduled to be arraigned on March 31st in a Houston County Circuit Court for the nine felony theft charges previously filed.
Theft of property offenses in the state of Alabama are generally separated into three degrees and carry the following penalties:
- Theft of Property in the first degree is a Class B felony
- A prison sentence between 2 to 20 years
- Fines not exceeding $10,000
- Theft of Property in the second degree is a Class C felony
- A prison sentence of 2 to 20 years
- Fines not exceeding $5,000
- Theft of property in the third degree is a Class A misdemeanor
- A prison sentence of no less than one year
- Fines not exceeding $6,000
If you or someone you know has been charged with theft of property, it is important that you contact an experienced criminal attorney to handle your case. The attorneys of Boles Holmes White are experienced in a variety of legal matters and have a history of success in the courtroom. Schedule a consultation today.
- Published in Criminal Law
Three Arrested in Dothan Armed Robbery Case
A brief armed robbery investigation by the Dothan Police Department officially concluded on Tuesday night with the arrest of three individuals. According to Police Sergeant Maurice Eggleston, Johnathon Walker and Joshua Marsh were taken into custody around 11:00 p.m. and charged with first-degree armed robbery. Demetrus Heath was arrested earlier in the day and also charged with first-degree armed robbery.
According to investigators, on March 14th a 22 year old male was approached in the 1000 block of South Bell Street and robbed by Heath, Walker, and Marsh. The victim was held at gunpoint by one of the suspects while the other two searched through the victim’s vehicle. The three suspects were able to flee the scene with items belonging to the victim but were later identified.
Dothan Police Lieutenant Will Benny, the supervisor of the criminal investigation division, released a statement confirming that no one had been injured during the robbery.
Police issued warrants for the suspects on March 17th and were able to arrest Heath, 18, during a traffic stop the following day. Walker, 20, and Marsh, 20, were taken into custody after turning themselves in to the Dothan Police Department later that evening.
All three suspects were taken to the Houston County Jail and are being held on $60,000 bail each.
In the state of Alabama, armed robbery is a class A felony with a sentencing range from 10 to 99 years in prison for a first offense. The sentence can be enhanced if the defendant has been convicted of prior felonies.
If you or someone you know has been charged with armed robbery, it is important that you contact an experienced criminal attorney to handle your case. The attorneys of Boles Holmes White are experienced in a variety of legal matters and have a history of success in the courtroom. Schedule a consultation today.
- Published in Criminal Law
Houston County Man Charged with Child Solicitation
Rodney Lynn Reese, 42, of Cowarts, is behind bars following a brief child solicitation investigation conducted by the Dothan Police Department. According to a statement from Dothan Police Sergeant Maurice Eggleston, Reese has been charged with felony electronic solicitation of a child and been taken to the Houston County Jail.
Investigators say on Tuesday March 6th Reese began communicating through a social media website, with a Dothan Police Officer whom he believed was a 14 year old female. During their conversations Reese said that he wanted to perform sexual acts with the 14 year old female and arranged to meet her locally in Dothan. Police took Reese into custody immediately after he arrived at the designated location where he expected to be meeting the girl.
Rodney Reese is currently being held on $75,000 bail.
As with most felonies, the range of punishment can include a deferred or suspended sentence, up to several years in prison. The long-term consequences can be more severe since online solicitation of a minor is considered a sexually related offense and defendants are often required to register as a sex offender. If a defendant fails to register, they can be charged with a new felony offense of failure to register as a sex offender.
If you or someone you know has been charged with child solicitation, it is important that you contact an experienced criminal defense attorney to handle your case. The attorneys of Boles Holmes White are experienced in a variety of legal matters and have a history of success in the courtroom. Schedule a consultation today.
- Published in Criminal Law
What is Child Support?
In Alabama child support is governed by Rule 32 of the Alabama Rules of Judicial Administration. The last revision of the guidelines became effective on January 1, 2009. The main change made was an extension of the guidelines to cover gross monthly income amounts in excess of 10,000.00. Currently the guidelines are calculated to apply to gross combined incomes of up to 20,000.00 per month.
Each parent is responsible for a percentage of the whole amount calculated. This percentage is determined by taking each parent’s monthly gross income and dividing it by the combined gross income of both parents.
Child support is awarded to the custodial parent per the percentage obtained by application of the guidelines and it is designated to meet the everyday basic needs of the minor child. The non-custodial parent will pay this percentage in monthly payments to the custodial parent. The custodial parent is responsible for his or her percentage also.
The “rub” so to speak with child support in Alabama is that even though the custodial parent has a percentage to pay there is no method to determine if that amount of money has been spent for the benefit of the minor child. The non-custodial parent however must be accountable for all payments made and can suffer severe consequences if the child support is not paid. The non-custodial parent may have his or her Alabama Driver’s License suspended, he or she may be held in contempt of court, have wages garnished by a withholding order, or may be placed in jail. In addition the non-custodial parent may not claim the payment of child support as an expense on his or her income taxes and the custodial parent is granted through the guidelines the ability to claim the minor children each year for income tax purposes.
There are only a couple of circumstances where the child support guidelines can be sidestepped and the application be avoided. Those are found in Rule 32 (A)(i)(ii) , and are as follows: “(i) A fair, written agreement between the parties establishing a different amount and stating the reason therefore; or (ii) A determination by the court based upon evidence presented in court and stating the reasons therefore, that application of the guidelines would be manifestly unjust and inequitable.” Rule 32 of the Alabama Rules of Judicable Administration.
These exceptions are not automatic and are at the discretion of the trial Judge in each case. Rarely does the court find that no child support should be awarded. Most Courts will award an amount of child support consistent with the guidelines.
It is also important to note that child support applies to all persons who share a biological child in common. There is not requirement that the parents have to have been married. If a couple has a child out of wedlock and have ceased their relationship the child support guidelines still apply. This is true even if the father is not listed on the birth certificate. The mother may file a petition for child support with the court and have the father appear. A paternity test ordered by the court will determine if the Child is the Father’s and if so the guidelines will be calculated and applied.
In summary, child support in Alabama is rigorously applied and monitored by the courts and other agencies. This is done to ensure that the minor children rather than the parents have sufficient means to live and have basic necessities provided to them by holding the parents responsible for their children and their care.
- Published in Divorce
Hall v. Florida and Intellectual Disability
On March 3, 2014, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Hall v. Florida. In Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the Supreme Court ruled that the execution of the mentally retarded (now referred to as “intellectual disability) violated the Eighth Amendment. Atkins allowed the states to formulate their own definitions of intellectual disability. What has actually happened is that the states have arrived at their own tests, some based upon accepted psychological standards and some not. Some state place heavy burdens upon the Defendant.
At issue in Hall v. Florida is Florida’s use of a bright line IQ score without the consideration of a standard deviation. Florida’s test takes into account the three standard elements in Atkins, but sets the IQ cut off at an IQ of 70, without consideration of the standard deviation of IQ testing. Such a standard is contrary to accepted clinical standards.
We can only hope that the Supreme Court will restrict the states’ ability to adopt overly restrictive and constitutionally defective standards. Atkins must be clarified to avoid sometimes bizarre and inconsistent standards.
- Published in Criminal Law
Divorce: Being Prepared
The decision to seek a divorce is normally based upon several factors. While the main reason is often the emotional situation between the parties, others include finances, issues surrounding children, and general discontentment.
If a person is considering a divorce, there are some things he or she should consider doing in preparation. The first is to create an emergency financial fund since divorces can create problems concerning living arrangements, bill paying, and attorney’s fees. It is important that the fund contains enough money to pay the current mortgage, or rent, on a new residence in case he or she is the one who will move out.
If there are children of the marriage, consideration should be given to paying temporary child support or potentially needing to support the children alone until a temporary order can be put into place. The ability to pay existing financial obligations, as well as any new ones, should be considered and prepared for also.
Divorce, or even a pre-divorce separation, can cause severe emotional stress on a household and consideration should be given on how to deal with it. Counseling for yourself and any children is often recommended. It may provide certain coping exercises and skills that will ease the transition from being a family unit, to living as a divorced family/couple.
Finally, in a pre-divorce preparation all financial records should be obtained or copies made. These should include tax filings for the last 3 years and statements of all current bills or credit card accounts. The involved parties should also be prepared to provide account numbers and information on all marital bank accounts; as well as the current value of checking accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts, retirement accounts, or any other accounts held by the parties. In addition there should be a list created of all real property owned by the parties along with: the debt owed, how much equity each holds, and copies of deeds or titles if possible.
Preparation of this type will help you and your attorney deal efficiently with your case. More importantly being prepared will help you maintain the mental health of your family while protecting your credit and lifestyle as much as possible.
- Published in Divorce
Eufaula Man Wanted on Capital Murder Charge
Authorities are still looking for Marques Ivory, 23, who is wanted on a capital murder charge in connection to a fatal shooting in Eufaula that took place around 10:45 p.m. on January 30th. The 20-year-old victim of the shooting, Darrian Scott, was taken by private vehicle to Medical Center Barbour and later transferred to Southeast Alabama Medical Center by Eufaula Rescue where he was pronounced dead. The incident was initially labeled as just a shooting but has since been upgraded to capital murder.
The shooting took place near State Docks Road where police confirm that Scott was shot in the back of the head while riding as a passenger in a vehicle. Authorities believe the gun shot that killed Scott came from within the vehicle Scott traveled in.
Several law enforcement agencies continue to aggressively look for Ivory including the Fugitive Task Force and the United States Marshall Service.
The Eufaula Police Department considers Ivory to be armed and dangerous and should not be approached. He is known to frequent the Bluff Park Apartment area as well as Georgetown, Georgia. Officers describe Ivory as a black male, 5 foot 5 inches tall, and around 170 pounds. He has a bald head or a shaved head with small dreads on top.
Anyone with information about Ivory’s whereabouts is urged to call the Eufaula Police Department at 334-687-1200.
- Published in Criminal Law
Man Convicted in Graduation Party Shooting
Kamaluddeen Raheem Russaw, 22, has been convicted by a Houston County jury on two attempted murder charges for his involvement in a shooting that took place at a graduation party last summer. Circuit Court Judge Larry Anderson scheduled a sentencing hearing for April 11, 2014 after prosecutors asked for a pre-sentence report to be completed. Russaw will face a maximum penalty of 20 to 99 years or life in prison for each charge.
Russaw was one of four individuals that were charged by Dothan Police in connection to a graduation party shooting at a home on East Washington Street on May 23, 2010. The prosecuting attorney, Assistant Houston County District Attorney Banks Smith, said that the incident took place after a man at the party told a passing motorist to slow down. Russaw allegedly had a conversation with the man before a beer can was thrown and shots were fired. After Russaw’s car was struck with gunfire, he left and collected his friends.
According to Smith, the two guilty verdicts announced were in relation to a second shooting that took place 45 minutes later when Russaw returned to the party with three other armed suspects.
Two suspects that were arrested have already been to court while a third suspect, Kamal Tuheed Russaw, remains wanted by police. Carlenius Keon Sandifer received a 60 year prison sentence after a jury convicted him of two less assault charges which included first degree assault and second degree assault. Brandon Layfatte Jones pleaded guilty to two similar assault charges but only received a 15 year sentence due to terms included in his plea agreement.
- Published in Criminal Law
Alabama’s Attorney General is Trying to Fast Track the Death Penalty
In the 2014 Legislative session, Attorney General Luther Strange is trying to speed up the execution process, citing long delays for the families of victims. House Bill 216 is the vehicle by which he is trying to accomplish that goal. The bill would provide that the direct appeal in a death penalty case run simultaneously with any post-conviction relief. The bill is being fast-tracked without enough time for meaningful investigation of all the implications.
The implications are numerous. Here are just a few. First, to hurry up an established process will make it less likely that flaws in convictions will be discovered. Not only will that lead to the affirming of wrongful convictions, but also to the execution of the innocent. That, alone, is enough reason that this bill should fail.
Second, how is this bill going to be funded? One of the biggest flaws in Alabama’s death penalty system is the lack of funds to pay lawyers to handle these cases. Death penalty cases require highly-skilled, experienced criminal attorneys. If the state wants to put someone to death, shouldn’t it at least be required to pay competent counsel?
Third, the passage of HB 216, will lead to more litigation. There will be a flood of litigation related to this bill alone should it become law. That will cost the state millions.
Fourth, if the appeals and post-conviction relief run simultaneously, will there be a method by which to allege ineffective assistance of counsel of appellate counsel? If not, then the bill is flawed in yet another way.
As the number of the innocent freed from prison mounts, can we afford to short cut the procedural safe guards in an already problematic system? We think not.
- Published in Criminal Law
Alabama Supreme Court Decision Impacts Future Divorce Cases
The Alabama Supreme Court made a landmark decision in 2013 when it struck down the decades old Ex parte Bayliss ruling. This decision should have long lasting effect on future domestic relations cases in the state. In Ex parte Bayliss, the court at the time established under what parameters a non-custodial parent could be forced to pay for the college education of his or her children after the reached the age of majority.
On its face the original Bayliss ruling seemed illogical due to the fact that all support obligations to a minor child cease upon the child reaching the age of majority, which in Alabama is 19. Many non-custodial parents were forced to make college payments that they could not afford because it was ordered in the original divorce decree or ordered in a hearing for post minority support.
Notwithstanding the legal arguments against the Bayliss rule, there was always one common sense argument:
Many families who are intact and don’t suffer a divorce cannot afford to send their children to college. So how can the court order you to simply because your are a divorced parent?
Chief Justice Roy Moore wrote the opinion of the Alabama Supreme Court that struck down application of Bayliss. He noted primarily that Bayliss was unconstitutional and amounted to the Court legislating law which exceeded the scope and authority of the Judicial branch.
The Court did not however make the ruling retroactive meaning it will only apply to new divorce cases only.
- Published in Divorce