- "Sexting" May Lead to Criminal Consequences
- Accidental Child Pornography Download Can Lead to Jail Time
- Accused of Sexual Abuse? Still Innocent Until Proven Guilty
- A Federal Case May Mean Increased Penalties in Drug Prosecutions
- Can I Get Out Of Prison Early On Advanced Supervised Release?
- Changes Ahead For Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentencing
- Changes to Sex Offender Registry Result in More Names Listed
- Child Pornography Through a Computer Virus?
- Court strikes down draconian North Carolina sex offender law
- Crime Lab Breakthrough Instrumental in HIV Infection Cases
- Cyber Hitchhiking: Thumbing A Ride On Facebook
- Debate Rages Over Sentencing Guidelines for Child Pornography-Related Crimes
- DNA Testing and the Presumption of Innocence in North Carolina
- Drinking And Driving Under 21 In North Carolina Can Mean Serious Trouble
- Embezzlement In North Carolina Can Get You In Criminal Trouble With The State Or The Feds
- Eyewitness testimony is persuasive but not always reliable
- Federal Correctional Complex, Butner (FCC Butner)
- Federal Correctional Institution, Bennettsville
- Food Stamp Trafficking: Defense Strategies for SNAP Retailers
- Gall v. United States
- Is it Time to Treat North Carolina Juveniles as Juveniles?
- Is shoplifting a misdemeanor in North Carolina?
- Making a Case: Do Mitigating Factors Have an Effect on Sex Offender Sentencing?
- Megan's Law Helpline Expands Into North Carolina
- Molecular Sex and the Duke Porn Star
- NC State Fair Tragedy Ends In Assault Arrest
- New Differential May Not Affect Discrimination in Federal Drug Sentencing
- North Carolina Child Sex Crime Conviction Has Harsh Consequences
- North Carolina Criminal Lawyer Can Help Explain Alford Pleas
- North Carolina Governor’s Staff Members Indicted
- North Carolina Law Strives to Take Race Out of Death Penalty Sentencing
- North Carolina SBI Lab Under Review: What Does It Mean for Prisoners?
- North Carolina sex offender law faces tough Supreme Court test
- North Carolina Students Cited for Underage Drinking
- Opinion: Sexting Is Not Child Porn
- Race and the Death Penalty in North Carolina
- Reform of Drug Sentencing Inequities Could Come in 2010
- Roberts Admitted to Practice Before United States Supreme Court
- Roberts Attending Acclaimed Trial Lawyers College In July 2010
- SBI Lab Practices Questioned
- Security Settings in File-Sharing Software May Lead to Unintended Sharing of Child Pornography
- Self Defense In North Carolina: Can You Stand Your Ground?
- Sentencing Discretion For Judges? A Look At The Current And Proposed Safety Valve Acts
- States Target Craigslist for Adult Services Ads
- The Dangers of Peer-to-Peer Sharing: How Innocent Users Can Be Arrested for Illegal Child Pornography
- The Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Mandatory Minimum Sentences
- Trading Before Heinz Buyout Triggers SEC Investigation
- United States v. Booker
- Were You Arrested In The Charlotte Drug Trafficking Corridor?
- What Can You Expect If Convicted Of An NC Sex Offense?
- What Should I Do If I Received A Target Letter?
- When can people reporting drug overdoses in N.C. qualify for immunity?
- When Is Your Sentence Up? North Carolina’s Post-Release Supervision Program
- Your Friends May Not Be the Only Ones Following You
- ‘Revenge Porn’ Raises Questions Involving Free Speech and Privacy
- “Teen Mom” Violence Leads to Criminal Charges in Indiana
Do You Have More Questions About Criminal Defense In Raleigh?
Contact Roberts Law Group online or at 919-521-4646 to schedule a free consultation with an experienced defense attorney from our Raleigh law firm. We're aggressive. We're experienced. We're here when you need us.
North Carolina vs. M.W.
Charge: Charge: Robbery with A Dangerous Weapon (4 Counts), First Degree Burglary, Conspiracy to Commit Robbery with A Dangerous Weapon
Facing: 12 - 17 years in prison
An incarcerated defendant accused our client of participating in the robbery of a group of youth at a party. We were able to raise doubt as to the credibility of this individual. In the end, the prosecutor dismissed these charges, citing a lack of evidence.