Trial Lawyer of the Year - William F. Nimmo

The Trial Lawyer of the Year award is presented to one lawyer whose trial work was considered the most exemplary in the community that year. In a community as vast as San Diego, this award is highly prestigious and signifies major trial capabilities. Criminal defense lawyer Bill Nimmo was honored this award by peers in the San Diego Criminal Defense Bar Association. Criminal defense lawyers receive this honor based solely on merit in the courtroom, not politics.

Mr. Nimmo received the Trial Lawyer of the Year award for a case that involved the death of a police officer, gunned down in a senseless act of violence. The client, a young African-American gang member, was charged with first degree murder with special circumstances in the killing of a young Caucasian police officer. If convicted on this count, the defendant would likely face the death penalty.

In this high profile case, the police officer was attempting to stop the client and his friends - gang members preparing to shoot up a rival gang - when he was shot. Over 300 officers responded to the scene following the shooting. Virtually every street was blocked off and helicopters searched for the killer. Over 1,000 witnesses were interviewed.

From the beginning, this was going to be a tough case for the defense. The defendant was an African-American gang member and he was charged with murdering a white cop. And because a police officer was killed, law enforcement and the prosecutor's office spared no expense or effort in attempting to convict the defendant.

The dead officer's partner told responding officers that the suspect ran in a particular direction wearing a green jacket (green was the local gang's color). The responding officers followed a hunch and headed towards a local drug house. Once there, they found the defendant dressed in a green sweatshirt, sweating profusely and breathing heavily. Witnesses said he had just come from the direction of the shooting and ran into the house.

Furthermore, a resident in the house came forward claiming the defendant had given him two guns (one of which was the murder weapon), and that he hid the guns in the backyard of the house where the defendant was found. The murder weapon was retrieved from the backyard.

Dedicated and unrelenting, the defense investigated and prepared the case for over two years. Mr. Nimmo hired experts in several topic areas, including dog search capabilities, eyewitness identification, and firearms and ballistics.

Bill Nimmo's investigation revealed major discrepancies in the prosecution's case. The resident who claimed he was given the guns was in fact a local dope addict and a brother of a police detective. Also, searches by highly trained search dogs, prior this same detective's arrival on the scene, failed to produce the weapon. Using this evidence, Mr. Nimmo strongly suggested that the detective, trying to protect his informant brother, planted the murder weapon in the back yard in order to implicate the defendant.

In addition, the defense recreated the street lighting at a critical intersection to demonstrate that the defendant's clothing would have been clearly visible and distinctive to the dead officer's partner who was also chasing the suspect.

Mr. Nimmo showed further discrepancies in the identification of the suspect. He successfully illustrated that the defendant, a large slower man, would have had to have been a superior athlete to outrun the officer. The officer had near Olympic speeds in high school track distances similar to distances the night of the chase.

In the end, because of Bill Nimmo's , the jury deliberated for 17 days and ultimately deadlocked 6-6. The D.A.'s office dismissed the death penalty and after another trial and years of appellate litigation involving prosecutorial misconduct the defendant was offered a plea to voluntary manslaughter, which he accepted.

Site developed by Nobis Interactive