While it is impossible to guarantee a specific result in any case, I believe that the best predictor of future performance is past results. I have had significant success providing criminal defense in cases involving a variety of misdemeanors and felonies including drug offenses, DUI, assault and battery, murder and manslaughter, and cases involving juveniles and immigrants. Some of the case I have handled include:

WINS FOR JOSEPH NORWOOD’S CLIENTS

January 2012 Tulsa County District Court

D.H. was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol ( DUI ).  Since D.H. is a business professional that depends on his drivers license and auto insurance as tools for his profession he could not afford to take a conviction or even be put on probation for D.U.I. due to the affects on his auto insurance and drivers license.  D.H. trusted lawyer Norwood to handle this important matter for him and it paid off.  At a jury trial the Broken Arrow police officer who arrested D.H. was forced to admit to dozens of errors that were uncovered by Attorney Norwood while cross examining the police officer.  The Broken Arrow police officer was a certified instructor in the standard field sobriety tests ( S.F.S.T. ) that were administered to D.H.  Even with the officer being a certified instructor in the standard field sobriety tests ( SFST ) Attorney Norwood was able to discredit the pull over and the administration of the test.  At the jury trial D.H. was found not guilty.  D.H. kept his drivers license, his auto insurance was not affected and he was able to keep his job.

June 2011 Cherokee County District Court

E.M., who is a permanent resident (has his green card) was charged with first degree rape.  After a preliminary hearing where the state of Oklahoma’s case was effectively dismantled, the district attorney offered E.M. a reduction from first degree rape to misdemeanor assault and battery, a no contest plea and a deferred sentence probation for one year and a fifty ($50) dollar fine.  At the conclusion of the deferred sentence probation E.M. will have the case dismissed and the case will be expunged from the public records.  E.M. happily accepted the plea deal and will be able to remain a free man.

January 2011 Tulsa County

J.B. was charged with felony delivery of marijuana after an undercover officer approached him in a local Tulsa bar and asked him for some marijuana.  After the officer asked for the marijuana several times J.B. gave him some.  The officer arrested J.B. for delivery of marijuana.  Attorney Joseph Norwood argued sentencing entrapment.  Sentencing entrpment means that an individual may be guilty of one crime, in this case possession of marijuana, but the government entrapt the person into a more severe crime, in this case delivery.  The sentencing entrpment argument was successful and the felony delivery of marijuana was reduced to misdemeanor possession of marijuana.  J.B. went home a happy man.

March 2010 Tulsa County

C.D. was charged with possession with intent to distribute marijuana.  At a preliminary hearing, where the police officer that arrested C.D. testified, a Tulsa County District Judge dismissed the case for lack of evidence in regard to the element of intent to distribute.  Under cross examination from attorney Norwood, the officer was forced to admit that certain evidence the government was trying to use against lawyer Norwood’s client was more likely present for other reason.

December 2009 Tulsa County District Court

J.H. was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) in the District Court of Tulsa County.  The state was being unreasonable, as usual, so lawyer Norwood set the case for trial.  Through attorney Norwood’s investigation he was able to determine that the sheriff who arrested J.H. was on vacation when the trial was set.  This means that the state would not be able to have their witnesses at trial.  Lawyer Norwood insisted on the trial going and strenuously objected to any passes so the state had to tell the judge that they were not ready for trial and the case was dismissed.

July 2009 Tulsa County District Court

D.S. was charged with two counts of second degree burglary.  D.S. is a permanent resident and needed to receive a dismissal or an extraordinarily good deal to be able to renew his permanent residency card.  After lots of litigating, motion writing and trial threatening attorney Joseph Norwood was able to convince the Tulsa County D.A’s office to offer D.S. a plea agreement that will allow him to renew his permanent residence status.

May 2009 Tulsa County District Court

W.L. was charged with uttering a forged instrument.  After consulting with his client, obtaining the police reports and conducting an investigation into the allegations attorney Joseph Norwood was able to prove that W.L. was set up and the charges were dismissed.

May 2009 Tulsa County District Court

K.S. was charged with obtaining welfare by fraud due to a very tough time she was going through trying to raise her children without their father.  The State of Oklahoma, through the Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office filed charges several years later when, fortunately, K.S. was doing better.  Mr. Norwood was able to work out a deal where K.S. could have her record expunged as soon as she paid some of the alleged wrongfully obtained money back.  K.S. now has no criminal record, has a great job and is doing great.

April 2009 Tulsa County District Court

H.S. was charged with felony Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol (DUI) with a great bodily injury accident resulting.  H.S. was leaving a popular restaurant/bar area in the greater Tulsa and Jenks area after having had a few drinks with family and friends when she was arrested for the DUI.  The DUI accident occurred after dark when H.S. was turning left and failed to see a motorcycle.  The rider of the motorcycle received significant injuries.  H.S. made the mistake of initially retaining an attorney that did not fight as hard as Joseph Norwood.  After the other attorney waived many of H.S.’s rights she started to figure out that her attorney was not doing a good job and she retained Joseph Norwood.  Lawyer Joseph Norwood entered the case, did an investigation, did research on the applicable law and filed several motions with the Tulsa County District Court to get H.S.’s rights back.  Among the significant errors that H.S.’s prior lawyer made was their failure to make sure the officers that arrested H.S. and administered her breathalyzer for the DUI did their jobs properly.  Attorney Norwood was able to discover that the blood alcohol test was administered outside of the time that is statutorily permitted for a resulting blood alcohol content reading to be admitted into court.  Lawyer Norwood also asked the court to find that H.S.’s prior attorney was ineffective and incompetent.  During that hearing attorney Norwood was able to establish that the blood alcohol test was faulty.  The state of Oklahoma, through the Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office figured out that the case was going south for them and offered H.S. a stellar deal where she would be on a very short unsupervised deferred probation.  H.S. having been facing prison time before jumped on the deal.  The deferred probation time passed quickly and the case was dismissed and expunged off H.S.’s record.

January 2009 Tulsa County District Court

L.R. was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.  After obtaining the police reports and conducting an investigation Mr. Norwood discovered that the complaining witness was lying and unlikely to show for court.  When the District Attorney started to offer very good plea deals Attorney Norwood knew that the State of Oklahoma had problems with their case and told them to “get their witnesses, were not taking a deal.”  The State of Oklahoma dismissed and L.R. walked free.

January 2009 Wagoner County District Court

D.P. was charged with possession of a controlled dangerous substance, cocaine) with intent to distribute.  The State of Oklahoma, in this case the Wagoner County District Attorney’s Office, wanted to convict D.P. and hang a felony on him for the rest of his life.  D.P insisted that he had no intention to distribute the cocaine and attorney Joseph Norwood recognized that the Broken Arrow police violated D.P.’s fourth amendment constitutional right against illegal search and seizure.   D.P. decided to exercise his right under the Oklahoma Constitution to a preliminary hearing and Lawyer Norwood was happy to oblige.  At the preliminary hearing lawyer Norwood was able to establish facts that indicated that the Broken Arrow Police did violate the fourth amendment rights of D.P.  Attorney Norwood established at the preliminary hearing that the officer performed a “knock and talk” and then “B.S.ed” their way into the residence where D.P. was.  There was no search warrant and there were no exigent circumstances that would allow for a search without a warrant.  The probable cause to enter without a search warrant was also tenuous at best.  After writing a motion to suppress based on the governments violation of D.P.’s fourth amendment rights and having a hearing the Wagoner District Judge over ruled lawyer Norwood’s motion stating attorney Norwood may be right but he (the Judge) was not going to dismiss the case and we can take him up on appeal to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.  Unfortunately in the state of Oklahoma the law does not allow an appeal on constitutional grounds except upon a conviction. That means that D.P. would have to go to a jury trial and risk prison time to appeal the judge’s decision.  Lawyer Norwood consulted with the judge and the prosecutor about how to proceed and they all agreed to have a bench trial where the judge would find D.P. guilty, give D.P. a deferred probation and D.P could have his appeal without D.P. having to risk prison time.  When the judge agreed to this the Wagoner County District Attorney’s Office agreed to reduce the charge to a simple possession and give D.P. a deferred probation.  D.P. wanting to end the situation and not being able to afford an appeal jumped on the plea offer.

September 2008 Tulsa County District Court

The Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office tried to convict P.P. of first degree murder which carries a punishment of life, where P.P. would actually have to do at least 38 years, or life without parole. These are the only punishment options that P.P. would have if convicted of first degree murder. In a jury trial Joseph Norwood was able to hang the jury up with a vote of the jury being split right down the middle.  Half the jurors voted to convict P.P. of murder and the other half voted to find P.P. not guilty.  The government, the Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office, offered P.P. a significantly reduced plea deal to a lesser charge than first degree murder and a term of ten years with credit for time served.  P.P. had done a year by the time of the jury trial and therefore he would only have to do several more years and will be released from prison by the time he is 30 years old.

August 2008 Tulsa County District Court

The Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office charged M.H., a minor, with first degree murder. Lawyer Joseph Norwood was able to convince a Tulsa County Judge to certify M.H. as a youthful offender after a hearing where Attorney Joseph Norwood presented four witnesses in her defense.  The four witnesses were physiological experts that all testified that M.H. should be classified as a youthful offender for punishment purposes.  If M.H. was found to not qualify as a youthful offender she would be facing punishment of life, where M.H. would have to actually do at least 38 years, or life without parole, where M.H. would never be released from prison. These are the only punishment options that M.H. would have if convicted of first degree murder and not found to be eligible as a youthful offender. Since lawyer Norwood was able to have M.H. certified as a youthful offender she will now be allowed to walk free by the time she is 20 years old. The Tulsa County D.A.’s office appealed the Judge’s ruling in favor of attorney Norwood’s client, M.H., to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest Court in the State of Oklahoma for criminal cases. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals found that the Tulsa County Judge that ruled for youthful offender status for M.H. was correct and the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the Tulsa County Judges ruling in favor of lawyer Joseph Norwood’s client.  M.H. will now walk free when she is 20 years old.

April 2006 Tulsa County District Court

W.L. was charged with violation of a protective order.  Lawyer Joseph Norwood uncovered evidence that W.L. was not at the location that the alleged victim claimed he was at the time of the alleged violation of the protective order.  The State of Oklahoma dismissed the case at jury trial after finally realizing thier “victim” was lying.

April 2008 Tulsa County District Court

T.C. was charged with manufacturing a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute and child endangerment. After hearings and a motion written by Joseph Norwood the child endangerment and the manufacturing charges were dismissed by a Tulsa County Judge. This has reduced T.C.’s exposure to time in prison by several decades.

March 2008 Bixby Municipal Court

S.S. was charged with DUI. After motions and a hearing Joseph Norwood was able to convince the Judge to dismiss the case based on a lack of probable cause for the pull over and lack of jurisdiction of the arresting officers.

October 2007 Tulsa County District Court

O.R. was charged with trafficking a controlled dangerous drug, specifically cocaine base, for which he faced a minimum of 20 years in the Oklahoma Department of Corrections and a maximum sentence of life. After a preliminary hearing and motions written by Joseph Norwood, a Tulsa County District Judge dismissed the case. O.R. walked away a free man.

September of 2007 Tulsa County District Court

R.C. was on probation for knowingly concealing stolen property when she was charged again with knowingly concealing stolen property by the Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office. The District Attorney’s office filed an application to revoke the probation that R.C. was on along with the new charge she faced. This is when Joseph Norwood began to represent her. After several hearings and a motion the new case was dismissed along with the application to revoke. R.C. walked free.

May 2007 Tulsa County District Court

K.S. was charged with DUI, two counts of assault and battery on an officer and resisting arrest. After an investigation by Joseph Norwood was completed where a video of the incident was discovered the assault and battery on law enforcement officers were dismissed along with the obstructing charge. Joseph Norwood filed a federal civil rights action on behalf of K.S. against the officers which is currently pending.

April 2007 Tulsa County District Court

S.C. was charged with three counts of sexually abusing a minor child. After a year and a half of investigation, litigation, hearings and motions the State agreed to dismiss two of the counts of sexually abusing a minor child and reduced the third to a misdemeanor where S.C. plead no contest an received a differed probation sentence. S.C. did not have to register as a sex offender and the charges will be erased off his record at the conclusion of the probation.

January 2007 Tulsa County District Court

D.P. was charged with failure to comply with the State of Oklahoma’s sex offender registration laws. Attorney Joseph Norwood argued the affirmative defense of entrapment.  Lawyer Joseph Norwood was successful when he argued that D.P. was entrapped into violating the registration laws and the case was dismissed and D.P. walked free.

2007 Tulsa County District Court

The Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office charged G.A. with three different felony cases. In case one G.A. was charged with possession of controlled dangerous substance but the case was dismissed by a Tulsa County District Judge based on a motion to suppress written and filed by Joseph Norwood. The law enforcement officers that arrested G.A violated his Constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. constitution.

In case two G.A. was charged with possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. After a preliminary hearing involving the officers that arrested G.A. as witnesses, Joseph Norwood wrote a motion to quash for insufficient evidence which was sustained by a Tulsa County District Judge and the case was dismissed.

In case three G.A. was charged with assault and battery on a police officer. With the jury in the hallway the District Attorney’s Office dismissed the assault and battery on an officer charge. Based on this case Joseph Norwood filed a federal civil rights law suit against the officers making the allegation against G.A. and secured a sizable settlement that put money in G.A,’s pocket.

March of 2007 Tulsa County District Court

The Tulsa County Attorney’s Office charged B.M. with second degree rape. After an investigation done by Lawyer Joseph Norwood and forcing the District Attorney’s hand the government was forced to dismiss the case and B.M. walked free.

December 2006

A.B. was charged with possession of marijuana and had $15,000 confiscated when law enforcement served a search warrant on his residences. Lawyer Joseph Norwood was able convince a Tulsa District Judge to dismiss the marijuana charge based on a motion Attorney Joseph Norwood wrote alleging that the law enforcement officers violated A.B.’s Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful searches and seizures. In a separate civil forfeiture action Joseph Norwood convinced a different Tulsa Judge to dismiss the forfeiture action and the entire $15,000 was returned to A.B.

February 2006

D.H. was charged with two criminal cases. Case one was a felony case of stalking, intimidating a witness and violation of a protective order. In case two D.H. was charged with domestic assault and battery. Attorney Joseph Norwood was able to convince a Tulsa District Judge to dismiss the felony case of stalking based on a motion to quash. The State of Oklahoma dismissed the remaining counts of intimidating a witness and violation of a protective order on the eve of trial. The Tulsa District Attorney’s Office dismissed the domestic assault and battery case with the jury standing in the hallway. D.H. walked free.

February 2006

N.R. was charged with first degree burglary, assault and battery with a deadly weapon, committing a felony with a mask on, domestic assault and battery and violation of a protective order. N.R. was accused of breaking into his ex-girlfriends house and stabbing her in the chest four times. The couple was going through a very heated custody battle at the time of the allegations. First degree burglary carries a minimum of seven years in the Oklahoma Department of Corrections (D.O.C) and a maximum of life in D.O.C., assault and battery with a deadly weapon carries a maximum of life in D.O.C. With both crimes N.R. would have to serve a minimum of 85% of the time he would be sentenced to. At a jury trial Attorney Joseph Norwood obtained a not guilty verdict on all counts for N.R. and the Tulsa District Judge ordered him to be allowed to leave the courtroom a free man.

2005

T.S. and Y.S., sisters-in-law were charged with larceny of merchandise from a retailer. At a jury trial Lawyer Joseph Norwood convinced a jury to find T.S. and Y.S. not guilty and they walked free.

R.W. was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. After an investigation and holding the States feet to the fire, the case was dismissed the day before the trial.

T.M. was charged with manufacturing methamphetamine. After several hearings and motions the case was dismissed by the State the day of trial.

A.H. was charged with trafficking in cocaine base and facing a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of life in the Oklahoma Department of Corrections. After a preliminary hearing, attorney Joseph Norwood wrote a motion to quash that was sustained by a Tulsa County Judge and the case was dismissed… A.H. walked free.