However, facts differ from case to case, as do results. This report does not constitute a promise, prediction or guarantee regarding any future work. The Pierce Law Firm, P.C. can only promise to do its best to obtain the best result for its clients. Just a few of these results are listed here.
Oklahoma v. HDB, Cleveland County, CF-92-812. Defendant charged with 1st degree murder and wrongfully convicted of 2nd degree murder because the trial judge, despite Mr. Pierce’s strong vocal objections, made a legal error in allowing Mr. Baker’s ex-wife to testify about a statement he made to her during their marriage. Conviction reversed by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals and sent back to the trial court where Mr. Pierce then obtained a full dismissal of the case.
Oklahoma v. RJL, McCurtain County, CRF-93-52. Defendant charged with 1st degree murder of her 70 year old husband who she shot nearly 18 times as he sat on the floor eating a bowl of ice cream. This was a landmark trial in Oklahoma for being the first pre-appeal jury acquittal using the battered wife defense after that defense was accepted by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.
Oklahoma v. CDB, Oklahoma County, CF-96-3674. Defendant charged with 1st degree murder in alleged gang related car-to-car shooting. After nearly three days of trial proceedings, and vigorous cross-examination of a self-professed “eye-witness”, Mr. Billingsley was acquitted after only 16 minutes of jury deliberation.
Oklahoma v. TDB, Cleveland County, CF-93-352/423/427/430/431/436. Represented Defendant in another landmark trial, as it was the first Oklahoma trial of alleged street gang members under the R.I.C.O. (racketeering) statutes. Besides racketeering, however, Mr. Banner was also tried simultaneously for eleven other crimes, including possession of cocaine, robbery by force, grand larceny and embezzlement. After 8 days of trial and the prosecutor’s admonitions for a lifetime of prison, the jury acquitted Mr. Banner of racketeering and everything else but one count each of robbery, larceny and embezzlement. Mr. Banner spent only 3 years and a month in prison.
Oklahoma v. DDC, McCurtain County, CRF-94-250. Defendant (town drunk) charged withassaulting two police officers with a shotgun. Obtained an acquittal by jury.
Oklahoma v. RJB, McCurtain County, CRF-94-271. Defendant, a twice convicted felon, charged with assault and battery on a police officer and possession of cocaine. Waived bifurcation by admitting prior convictions and was acquitted by a jury on both counts.
Oklahoma v. WKM, Cleveland County, CF-96-1964. Defendant charged with 6 counts ofrape and other sex crimes, including sodomy and lewd molestation. Obtained dismissal of 2 counts of rape after the presentation of state’s evidence and acquittal on all remaining counts by jury after presentation of defense.
Oklahoma v. ALG, Cleveland County, CF-96-1580. Defendant charged with shooting with intent to kill and concealing stolen property. Mr. Green, a 44 yr old alcoholic, was being continually harassed and threatened by a 17 yr old thug. Mr. Green, having all he could take, shot the 17 year old with a gun that he had found earlier in a field. The concealing stolen property charge was dismissed by the judge. The jury found Mr. Green guilty of shooting with intent to kill but refused to assess any further punishment against him as he had already spent eight months in the county jail awaiting trial. The judge granted the jury’s wish and released Mr. Green on the spot and in front of the jury with no probation or additional jail time.
Oklahoma v. MLK, Cleveland County, CF-99-1844. Defendant with frontal lobe brain disorder and multiple prior felony convictions charged w/ assault & battery on a deputy after being antagonized, pepper-sprayed and dogpiled by guards inside the Cleveland County jail. In Mr. Kious’ defense, Mr. Pierce presented the testimony of America’s foremost expert in forensic neurology and a west coast expert in the effects of pepper spray. That evidence, combined with vigorous direct and cross-examination of numerous past and present jail personnel, resulted in an acquittal by the jury.
Oklahoma v. MLK, Cleveland County, CF-99-2212. Same defendant with multiple prior felony convictions charged with assault and battery (biting) of a Moore police officerwho, with his fraternal brothers, unnecessarily inflamed Mr. Kious though he had committed no crime. The officers forced a foot chase and the “victim” wrapped his hand around Mr. Kious’ face and tackled him on the pavement. Mr. Kious resisted. Again, presenting the testimony of neurologist, Dr. Jonathon Pincus, plus that of Kansas City forensic psychiatrist Dr. William Logan, the jury heard a dual defense of not guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity. Mr. Pierce used the officers’ own reports and the leather glove of the “victim” as a basis of cross examination and closing, whereupon, the jury brought back a general verdict of not guilty.
Oklahoma v. MLK, Cleveland County, CF-99-869. Same defendant with multiple prior felony convictions charged with arson in the burning of a stolen vehicle. Waived two-stage trial, admitted Mr. Kious’ prior convictions during jury selection and opening argument, then won an acquittal based mostly on the vigorous cross-examination of the sole eye-witness who was a self-professed drug addict.
Oklahoma v. JDT, Cleveland County, CF-2001-690. Defendant charged with forcible sodomy and 1st degree rape of his then 14 year old step-daughter. Mr. Tullis married into an already dysfunctional household consisting of a mother and two daughters. Mr. Tullis established and began enforcing rules that encroached upon the 14 year old’s independence, and the power struggle culminated in accusations of sexual abuse. After the examination of many witnesses and an especially vigorous cross-examination of the teenager by Mr. Pierce, using DHS records, school records and her own diary to attack her credibility, the jury completely acquitted Mr. Tullis.
Oklahoma v. DKR, McCurtain County, CF-2002-14. Defendant charged with robbery by force, assault & battery w/ dangerous weapon and stealing the automobile of a 63 year old lady. This prosecution was based on the victim’s identification of Mr. Roberts. No physical evidence connected him to the crime. By thorough questioning and relentless demands for medical records, Mr. Pierce discovered, and proved at trial, that the victim was legally blind with glasses. Mr. Pierce also established that the victim had selected Mr. Roberts from an improperly administered photo-lineup after being told that the defendant was her assailant. The jury found Mr. Roberts not guilty on all counts.
Oklahoma v. PJA, Cleveland County, CF-2002-974. Defendant (a lawyer) charged with 1st degree rape. In spring 2002, a former client of Mr. Anderson claimed that she had been raped repeatedly during the course of their attorney-client relationship. These accusations spurred an overzealous police detective to conduct a well publicized series of investigations into Mr. Anderson’s personal sex life. The “investigations” – all classic cases of shoddy police work – culminated in a media frenzy and three separate rape cases being filed against Mr. Anderson. The second case filed was the first to be tried – alleging the 1st degree rape of a woman who claimed to be in an attorney-client relationship with Mr. Anderson when she was made pregnant “without her knowledge and against her consent” in 1996. After forcing the charges down to 2nd degree rape, Mr. Pierce tried the case to a jury for four days. By vigorous cross-examination of the complaining witness, using her own medical records and her prior testimony to attack her credibility, Mr. Pierce won an acquittal for Mr. Anderson in less than two hours of jury deliberation. The remaining cases were dismissed.
Oklahoma v. CH, McCurtain County, CF-2003-449. Defendant charged with 1st degree murder for shooting and killing a local lawyer’s son. At trial, Mr. Pierce revealed that the deceased, at the time he was shot, 1) was pointing his own gun at Mr. Henderson, 2) was known to use guns against even his “friends”, and 3) had five different drugs in his bloodstream. Having also pointed out that the shot pattern was consistent with Mr. Henderson’s account of simultaneously shooting and running scared, Mr. Pierce obtained a not guilty verdict by reason of self-defense.
Oklahoma v. SS, Beckham County, CF-2003-260, Defendant charged with trafficking 175 grams of crystal methamphetamine found in the rental car she was driving from California to Ohio. The stop, search and conversation between Ms. Shanks and her companion, Franchini, were recorded by the trooper-cam. Franchini, a three time convicted felon, testified at trial that Ms. Shanks helped him package the methamphetamine and that she knew that she was transporting it. Mr. Pierce’s masterful cross-examination exposed Franchini’s dubious character and complete unreliability as a witness. Ms. Shanks then testified that she had no knowledge of the drugs in the car and the jury found her not guilty.
Oklahoma v. LCU, Oklahoma County, CF-2003-2423. (trial 04/2005) Defendant accused of nearly 60 different lewd acts including 1st degree rape and sexual abuse. His two step-daughters wanted to live with their biological dad and resorted to “nuclear” tactics when their mother said no. Mr. Pierce attacked the girls’ trial testimony with their prior inconsistent statements to family, counselors and detectives; whereas, twelve family members and friends testified to Mr. Upton’s character as a good and trustworthy father. Also, Dr. Ray Hand, PhD., testified about the potential unreliability of these kinds of accusations and the taint of slipshod investigative tactics. The jury completely acquitted Mr. Upton.
Oklahoma v. RMH, Cleveland County, CF-2003-1143. (trial 05/2005) Defendant charged with delaying and obstructing an officer‘s investigation into a car driven by Mr. Harris’ friend. The policeman, angered by the driver’s uncooperativeness, refused to acknowledge Mr. Harris’ assistance in the investigation. Mr. Pierce cross-examined the officer about his mistakes and inconsistencies in his reports, and the twisting of Mr. Harris’ statements into a confession to a crime that he did not commit. The jury found Mr. Harris not guilty in only 30 minutes.
Oklahoma v. WLP, Oklahoma County, CF-2002-922. (trial 09/2005). Defendant charged with armed robbery after a man was robbed at gunpoint while fueling his car. The man followed the culprit to a house and called the police who entered and found Wesley with his friends (of similar skin tone and stature) playing video games in a back room. A street line-up was conducted in the dark of night resulting in Wesley’s identification and arrest. At trial, the State presented its witnesses whom Mr. Pierce cross-examined vigorously, bringing out that the victim, during the line-up actually identified the boys as a group – not Wesley as an individual, though only one person committed the robbery. Having ruthlessly attacked the eye-witness identification process, Mr. Pierce demurred to the state’s evidence mid-trial, and the judge dismissed the case, sending both Mr. Powell and the jury home.
Oklahoma v. CEB, McCurtain County, CF-2007-86. (trial 04/2008). Defendant charged with1st degree murder of a reputed “4th generation” Blood mobster and with shooting w/ intent to kill the mobster’s younger associate. The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation or OSBI investigated the crime and presented these charges to the DA’s office for prosecution. Trial lasted 4 days. Mr. Pierce presented the testimony of shooting reconstruction expert Edward E. Hueske of Denton, TX to show the most likely placement of the actual shooter (whom Mr. Pierce posited to be the defendant’s brother). Mr. Hueske’s presentation along with Mr. Pierce’s meticulous cross-examination of the state’s witnesses (including 3 so-called eyewitnesses), and his careful direct examination of Mr. Brown himself, resulted in not guilty verdicts on both charges after only 55 minutes of jury deliberation.
Oklahoma v. PLZ/BMZ, Cleveland County, CM-2011-1122/1123 [Expunged from public record]. BMZ was driving his Corvette through a residential area when he was stopped by the police, then arrested for DUI. His wife, PLZ, was arrested for Possessing a Firearm While Intoxicated (gun in purse). Mr. Pierce filed pre-trial Motions to Suppress and Dismiss in both cases, asserting 1) that the police did not have the authority to stop BMZ since no officer observed BMZ break any law, nor could any officer articulate any suspicion that BMZ was breaking the law; and, 2) therefore, none of the criminal evidence that was gathered after the bad stop could be used against this couple. At a pre-trial hearing, the Judge agreed with Mr. Pierce that the stop was illegal, and suppressed all of the evidence against the couple. Whereafter, with no evidence to make its case, the State dismissed all chargesagainst PLZ and BMZ. The police, also, had to give PLZ’s gun back to her. This, truly, is what you call “getting the case thrown out”.
Oklahoma v. DMC, Cleveland County, CM-2011-1657 [Expunged from public record]. DMC, was clinically diagnosed with a schizoaffective disorder in 2008. One early morning in 2011 he was restless and awake, so he went to get some fast food. He was stopped for speeding. Because of DMC’s mental condition, he did not respond to the OUPD officer’s questions and commands according to the officer’s expectations, so, he was arrested for DUI. Most police officers are ill-trained and hesitant to differentiate mental illness from behavior caused by substance abuse. Routinely, police force odd pegs into the few slots with which they are familiar – this time, the slot was DUI. Prior to trial, Mr. Pierce , using the reports of Psychiatrist Joseph M. Ripperger, MD, and Forensic Psychologist Shawn Roberson, PhD, presented the Cleveland County DA with compelling evidence that DMC’s behavior was consistent with his mental illness and not consistent with acute intoxication. The District Attorney dismissed the case before trial.
Oklahoma v. YOA, Cleveland County, CF-2010-1478. (trial 9/2012). YOA charged with 2nd Degree Felony Murder – DUI (carrying prison term of 20-life @ 85%), Leaving Scene of Fatality Accident, and False Reporting of a Crime. YOA drove away from a Norman party and rear-ended a car sitting at a stop light, killing the driver. At trial, the state presented seven (7) witnesses who, with YOA, had gone to Buffalo Wild Wings on the eve of the fatal crash, until close, and then, on to a Norman apartment to continue drinking into the next morning. Each witness stated that YOA was drunk by the time he left the apartment. Mr. Pierce, by thorough, animated, and unrelenting cross-examination, exposed these witnesses’ bias, drunkenness, and unreliability to such an extent that, on Mr. Pierce’s request, the judge threw out the Murder/DUI charge. The court, nevertheless, granted the State the chance to try to convince the jury of a 1st Degree Manslaughter charge that also carried a prison term of 20-life @ 85% (meaning that 85% of sentence must be served before release); but, the State’s closing arguments failed against the power of Mr. Pierce’s summation. The jury, instead, found YOA guilty of Negligent Homicide, a misdemeanor, that carried only one (1) year in the county jail.
Terry L. Pierce has defended clients charged with the following crimes. Again, this is not an exhaustive list, but is intended to give an indication of the breadth of his experience in the field of criminal defense:
|Accessory to crime
Arson 1st deg
Arson 2nd deg
Arson 3rd deg
Assault & Battery (Az/Bt)
Attempt to use stolen credit card
Az w/ dangerous weapon
Az w/ deadly weapon
Az/Bt on police officer
Breaking and entering
CDS in penal institution
Conspiracy to introd CDS into penal institution
Conspiracy to traffic in stolen prop
Contempt of court
Cruelty to animals
Defrauding an innkeeper
Disturbing the peace
Drug related seizures/forfeitures of property
Failure to display tax stamp
Feloniously carrying firearm
Feloniously pointing firearm
Fraud in obtaining foodstamps
Fugitive from justice
Grand larceny (various)
Home repair fraud
Incitement to riot
Injury to minor child
Killing/Injuring police dog
Knowingly concealing stolen prop
Larceny of automobile
Larceny of merchandise
Maintaining dwelling house used to keep/sell CDS
Malicious injury to property
Manufacture of child pornography
Motions for child cert
Motions to accelerate
Motions to revoke
Murder 1st deg
Murder 2nd deg
Obtaining CDS by fraud
Peeping tom (by video)
Poss of CDS
Poss of CDS w/ intent to distribute
Poss of child pornography
Poss of marihuana
Poss of paraphernalia
Possession of stolen vehicle
Rape 1st deg
Resisting police officer
Robbery 1st deg
Robbery 2nd deg
Robbery w/ dangerous weapon
Robbery w/ imitation firearm
Running a roadblock
Shooting from vehicle
Shooting w/ intent to injure
Shooting w/ intent to kill
Threatening/Harassing phone calls
Trafficking in drugs
Transporting drug proceeds
Unauthorized use of vehicle
Unlawful cultivation of marihuana
Unlawful Distribution of CDS
Violation of protective order