I Defended A Homeless Pregnant Woman For Armed Robbery. She Went Into Labor Seconds Before The Jury Read Her Guilty Verdict. Now The Feds Are Waiting Outside Her Delivery Room With Shackles.

I asked if Clementina from the residential program could join the call too. He said he already contacted her and she agreed to participate. We confirmed the dial-in number and time. I hung up and went back toward the labor room.

The prosecutor stopped me in the hallway. He asked if we could agree on basic facts before the hearing started. I told him we could agree that Nadia committed the robbery, but we strongly disagreed about what should happen to her baby. He looked uncomfortable but nodded. We both knew this hearing was going to decide everything.

I pushed back through the door into Nadia’s room. Dr. Beckwith was positioned at the end of the bed now. She looked up at me and said Nadia was fully dilated. The baby was coming soon, maybe within the hour. Nadia’s face was red and covered in sweat. She was breathing hard between contractions. Another one hit and Dr. Beckwith told her to push.

Nadia grabbed the bed rails and pushed with everything she had. Her scream filled the room. I moved to her side and took her hand again. She squeezed so hard I felt my bones grinding together. The contraction ended and she fell back against the pillows, gasping. She looked at me with exhausted eyes.

I told her about the emergency hearing. I said I needed to be on the phone in about 20 minutes to fight for her baby’s custody. She nodded and another contraction started building. Dr. Beckwith coached her through the pushing again. When it ended, Nadia looked at me and said something that almost broke me. She told me to go. She said she could do this part without me. She needed me to fight for her baby because that was more important than holding her hand right now.

The trust in her eyes despite everything she had been through cut straight through me. I squeezed her hand one more time and told her I would be right down the hall. I promised I would come back the second the hearing ended. She nodded and closed her eyes as another contraction started.

I walked out and found the small consultation room Jude had mentioned earlier. It was just a few doors down from the labor room. I could still hear Nadia’s cries through the walls. I sat down at the small table and pulled out my phone. I dialed the conference number the clerk had given me.

The line connected and I heard Judge Brener’s voice already on the call. He sounded wide awake despite the early hour. He said we were convening this emergency hearing to address the immediate custody question given that the baby would be born very soon. He asked who was on the line. I identified myself as Nadia’s attorney. The prosecutor joined and stated his name and office. Jude came on and introduced himself as co-counsel. Laya from CPS joined next.

The judge asked where my client was, and I explained she was currently in active labor down the hall and unable to participate. He accepted that and said we would proceed without her given the urgent circumstances.

The prosecutor started talking immediately. He laid out his position that Nadia was facing certain conviction for armed robbery. The jury had been about to read a guilty verdict when she went into labor. She would be going to prison. The baby needed immediate protective custody. He argued that allowing her to bond with the child only to separate them later would cause more trauma than removing the baby right after birth.

I jumped in before he could continue. I told Judge Brener that technically no verdict had been entered because the jury never finished reading it. Legally Nadia was still presumed innocent. I also said we had a viable alternative to immediate separation: a supervised residential placement that could keep mother and baby together safely. I explained that forced separation causes documented harm to newborns and mothers; research showed it. We could avoid that trauma while still ensuring safety and accountability.

Laya spoke up next. Her voice was measured and professional. She said CPS had concerns about Nadia’s criminal case and her circumstances, but she acknowledged that the residential program could provide adequate supervision if the court ordered strict compliance monitoring. Her agency could maintain oversight with unannounced visits at any time. She said separation was always a last resort, and if safety could be achieved through supervision, that was preferable.

Judge Brener asked her pointed questions. He wanted to know about the program’s security measures. What would happen if Nadia tried to leave or abscond? How quickly could CPS intervene if problems came up?

Laya answered each question carefully. She said the program had 24-hour staff presence and GPS monitoring of all residents. Any violation would trigger immediate alerts. CPS could be on site within minutes if needed. She said her agency would need to approve the specific program and review all safety protocols before agreeing to this arrangement, but she was open to it as an option if the court approved.

Judge Brener asked about the program’s track record. Laya said she would need to review their data, but preliminary information showed good outcomes for mothers who committed to following the rules.

Jude spoke up then. He said he had documentation to share that was relevant to the custody decision. He started reading from the records he had gathered. 3 weeks before the robbery, Nadia had applied to a homeless shelter for pregnant women. She was put on a waiting list; the shelter was full. 2 weeks before the robbery, she tried to get emergency food assistance. Her application was denied because she was missing paperwork about her residency status. 10 days before the robbery, she called a crisis pregnancy center that advertised help for mothers in need. She left two messages; they never called her back. 5 days before the robbery, she went to a community health clinic asking about prenatal care and resources. They gave her a list of phone numbers but no immediate assistance.

Jude explained that this evidence showed Nadia had tried to access help through proper channels before resorting to crime. She didn’t just wake up one day and decide to rob a store. She was desperate and every legitimate avenue had failed her. This context was important for understanding her motivation and her likelihood of being a good mother if given support.

The tone of the conversation shifted slightly after Jude presented this information. Even through the phone, I could sense people reconsidering their positions.

The prosecutor came back on. He acknowledged the evidence Jude presented. He said it provided helpful context, but he argued it didn’t change the fundamental facts. Nadia had committed armed robbery with a loaded gun. She pointed that weapon at another human being’s face and threatened to kill him. The store clerk was genuinely scared for his life. He suffered real trauma from that experience. The prosecutor said accountability was necessary regardless of Nadia’s circumstances.