Jeffrey Gaddy V. Williamson Case Summary

During the recess of the Chung case, Judge Moore motioned to move forward with the next case. The defendant Jeffrey Gaddy was presented to the court was along with Mr. Francisco. Once Mr. Francisco was sworn into court, defense attorney Clayton asked him to recall the incident. Mr. Francisco stated that the defendant Jeffery Gaddy was accused of burglary and breaking into the backdoor and two offices within ACE Tree Service. The officer on duty responded to the initially burglary call and found Mr. Gaddy fleeing from the scene of the crime. Mr. Francisco revealed that Jeffery Gaddy is the nephew of the company’s owner. Originally, Mr. Gaddy intended to break into the building in hopes of slashing the tires of an employee. The employee was
Mr. Gaddy’s cousin and the two are involved in a marijuana related altercation. Defense attorney Clayton argued that there was no probable cause due to the grounds that there is no indication of property damage and that there was no specific intent of burglary statue. Prosecuting attorney Lengen immediately responded by stating that, “regardless of the beef between Mr. Gaddy and his cousin, there was no good intention in Mr. Gaddy presence that night.” Judge Moore agreed with Mr. Lengen agreement and found reasonable grounds for probable cause. Defense attorney Clayton respected the judge’s decision and reserved the bond hearing for another time. This court case was straightforward and had little room for misinterpretation. The judge ruled in a reasonable manner and the defense attorney presented a weak defense to court. The defense attorney seemed unprepared and uninterested during the entire case. Yet, the defense attorney appeared as though he had won the case at the end. Attorney Clayton may be withholding some information for the Superior Court hearing and has decided stay optimistic. Regardless, the case was simple burglary offense with the intent to commit a crime.