FOLLOW US

What Prosecutors Say Happened

• A former Ninth Circuit Public Defender’s Office legal assistant is accused of signing a private demand letter as a “Senior Assistant Public Defender” despite not being licensed as an attorney.
• Investigators say Lashonda Charlen Ravenell used official public defender letterhead while seeking an additional $8,180 following a 2025 automobile collision.
• South Carolina law makes it a crime for an unlicensed person to represent themselves as a lawyer for purposes that include obtaining something of value.

By Samuel López | USA Herald

CHARLESTON, S.C. — A South Carolina legal assistant allegedly crossed a line that every experienced paralegal and legal professional is trained not to cross: presenting herself to another person as an attorney.

Lashonda Charlen Ravenell, 37, a former legal assistant with the Ninth Circuit Public Defender’s Office, was charged October 5 with impersonating a lawyer after an investigation requested by the Ninth Circuit Solicitor’s Office, according to the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division. Ravenell was booked into the Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center in Charleston County.

The case centers on a February 4, 2026 letter—and the details alleged in that document matter.

According to the arrest affidavit, Ravenell had been involved in a three-vehicle collision on Interstate 26 on September 11, 2025. She received a civil settlement from another party’s insurance company. Months later, authorities allege, she sent the owner of the at-fault vehicle another demand seeking $8,180.

Sending a demand for money after an accident is not, by itself, what created the criminal case.

Investigators say Ravenell sent the demand on Ninth Circuit Public Defender’s Office letterhead and used the office letterhead on the envelope. More importantly, authorities allege she signed the correspondence, “Lashonda Ravenell Senior Assistant Public Defender.” The South Carolina Bar had no record showing that Ravenell was licensed to practice law in the state, according to the affidavit.

Legal assistants and paralegals routinely perform substantial legal work. They may draft pleadings, organize evidence, communicate with clients, prepare discovery and assist attorneys with complex litigation. But they operate under attorney supervision. They do not acquire an attorney’s license—or the authority that comes with one—because they work inside a law office.

South Carolina law addresses that boundary directly.

Section 16-17-770 makes it unlawful for someone who is not a licensed lawyer to represent themselves as a lawyer for purposes including soliciting business, obtaining something of value or providing legal advice or assistance. A first offense is a misdemeanor carrying up to one year in jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both. Repeat violations carry increasingly severe penalties.

South Carolina separately prohibits unauthorized practice of law under Section 40-5-310. That statute provides that a person may not practice law or solicit another person’s legal cause unless authorized to do so and provides felony penalties of as much as five years imprisonment for violations meeting its requirements. Ravenell is presently reported as charged with impersonating a lawyer, not under that separate felony provision.

From an evidentiary standpoint, the alleged letter could become the central exhibit because prosecutors would not have to rely solely on competing recollections about what Ravenell supposedly told someone. If authenticated, the document itself may show the title used, the government office identified, the amount demanded and the context in which the representation was made.

There is also a public-trust issue. A demand arriving on public defender letterhead can carry institutional weight that an ordinary personal letter does not. The accusation therefore is not simply that Ravenell used the word “lawyer.” Authorities allege she invoked the identity of a government legal office while pursuing money arising from her own private automobile dispute.

The Ninth Circuit Solicitor’s Office requested the SLED investigation and will prosecute the case.

Ravenell has been charged, not convicted. The allegations remain subject to proof in court, and the prosecution bears the burden of establishing every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.

Stay Closer to the Evidence

If you value reporting that goes beyond the headline and examines the documents, laws and evidence behind major legal and national stories, join the USA Herald newsletter for exclusive reporting and analysis.

Follow USA Herald on X at @RealUSAHerald.