Disability Claims and Criminal Law Results
Results from Tennessee Social Security Law Firm
The attorneys at Byrd & Byrd, LLC, represent clients who need help with criminal defense or disability claims.
We practice in several different areas of law, including family law and real estate transactions for individuals and businesses, and offer clients a strong history of client-focused resolutions and results. But many of the particularly meaningful results of our work are in Social Security law and criminal law.
We concentrate our Social Security disability practice toward helping clients receive disability and SSI benefits under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act against tough odds. Without the help of an attorney, most of the time benefits are denied. We focus our criminal defense work toward dismissal, a reduction in charges, and plea bargains which clients can accept and manage within the context of their individual lives. If trial is necessary however, we stand ready to aggressively defend your rights before a judge or jury.
Help with Your Disability Claim
Most of our Social Security disability results have helped our clients live their lives in more comfort, peace and financial security than before they retained us. We understand the struggle, pain and depression experienced by those who have worked all of their lives, now cannot work and are faced with a fight to be paid the benefits for which the Government has withheld taxes over years of employment. We keep confidential the details of individual cases, but you may ask our attorneys about how the specifics of your claim may be similar to those we have worked before. We hope to repeat our successes of the past in future claims.
Criminal Law Results in Tennessee
State v. Transou, 928 S.W.2d 949 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996)
Before person can be found to constructively possess drugs, it must appear that person has power and intention at a given time to exercise dominion and control over those drugs, either directly or through others; constructive possession is ability to reduce object to actual possession.
Mere presence of person in an area where drugs are discovered is not, alone, sufficient to support finding that person possessed drugs.
Mere association with person who does in fact control drugs or property where drugs were discovered is insufficient to support finding that person possessed drugs.
State v. Boyd, 2004 WL 541128 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2004)
Defendants filed motions seeking production of search warrant affidavits at the General Sessions Court level. The General Sessions Court Judge entered orders allowing defendants to obtain affidavits from issuing magistrate, and State appealed. The Circuit Court, Madison County, consolidated actions and also entered an order requiring disclosure. State took interlocutory appeal.
Holdings: The Court of Criminal Appeals held that: the rules of discovery did not require disclosure of warrant affidavit, but the defendants were entitled to affidavits upon which search warrants were issued in order to attempt to meet burden of proof regarding probable cause challenge at the preliminary hearing level.