Badge - Avvo Rating 10, Superb
Badge - Natitonal Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
Expertise badge
Badge - Avvo Rating, Top Attorney
Expertise Best Criminal Attorneys in St. Petersburg
The National Trial Lawyers Top 100
Home » Page 19

Published on: | by

Florida’s 11th Circuit Court of Appeals recently explained that police confessions can be used in court to prosecute sex crimes and other offenses, even if the person who made the confession was intoxicated at the time.Mr. Arvelo was arrested and charged with attempted sexual battery and kidnapping with the intent to commit sexual battery, stemming from a 2006 incident in a Maitland parking garage. He allegedly attacked a woman as she was getting out of her car, and then he dragged the woman to Arvelo’s car. Arvelo was unable to start that car, however. When he got out to look at the engine, Arvelo’s victim locked the doors and started honking the horn. Arvelo fled after two of the victim’s coworkers noticed the commotion and called the police, according to the court.

Arvelo confessed after being apprehended and taken into custody by Maitland police. The 21-year-old was interrogated for three years. Arvelo argued on appeal that he was coerced into making the confession and that officers made false promises of leniency during the interrogation. He also said that the officers took advantage of the fact that Arvelo was drunk and sleep-deprived. He told the cops at the beginning of the interview that he’d drunk a bottle of whiskey earlier that morning and had not slept since.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Florida police officers and investigators go to great lengths to investigate sex crimes and other criminal offenses. A recent case out of the Fourth District Court of Appeals shows some of the limits on the things that they can do to help secure a conviction.The defendant was arrested and charged with three counts of sexual battery on a person less than 12 years old and one count of lewd and lascivious conduct. The charges came after a member of his family accused him of sexual abuse, according to the court. He declined to speak with police and requested a lawyer after being informed of his rights. He was placed in a jail cell while waiting for a bond hearing. A police informant who worked with cops in setting up and reporting prison drug transactions was also in the cell.

The informant told his handler shortly after the defendant was placed in the cell that he said he was facing sex crime charges and wanted to hire a hitman to kill the family member who accused him of abuse and the primary witness against him. The handler, who was not aware of the charges against the defendant, asked the informant to get more information on his intended targets. Following conversations with the informant and the handler, the police officer investigating the sex crime charges asked the informant not to seek additional information related to the charges. The cops did, however, ask the informant to present himself as “somewhat of a pedophile” to gain the defendant’s trust. They devised a scheme for the informant to offer to get the defendant in touch with a hitman.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Many criminal drug cases come down to search and seizure issues concerning how law enforcement gains evidence of the alleged crime. Generally, police officers need a warrant from a judge in order to search your home or other property. There are several exceptions to this rule, but even cases in which a search warrant has been issued can raise tricky legal issues. A recent case out of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida is a good example of how cops can establish probable cause to get a warrant in drug cases.Two defendants were charged with conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance, stemming from their alleged roles in an Orlando marijuana trafficking operation. Much of the evidence against the pair came from a series of property searches and surveillance operations conducted after Drug Enforcement Agency investigators obtained warrants from a federal judge. The defendants at trial later moved to block prosecutors from entering into the record any evidence obtained during the searches and surveillance operations. They argued that the investigators misled the judge by providing incomplete information on their warrant requests and that those requests didn’t establish the probable cause needed to justify the warrants.

The first warrant, which the DEA agents used to search a self-storage facility in Orlando, was based on information gained from a confidential source and from two undercover officers. The confidential source told agents that a South African drug dealer had been selling 200 pounds of marijuana a month to Dominican buyers in Orlando. He said the dealer had asked the source to contact the Dominicans about some $250,000 still owed for the drugs and to try to re-establish the relationship. The confidential source and two undercover agents met with Cassara and Almeida four times. They agreed to facilitate a marijuana sale to the Dominicans, according to the court. One defendant said he would load 25 pounds of marijuana in a truck and leave it for the Dominicans to pick up in exchange for leaving cash in the truck.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Sexual battery and other sex crimes are serious offenses that often come with significant penalties and jail time. Those penalties go up when the victim of the crime is a minor. As Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeals recently explained, sexual battery on a minor encompasses a wide range of forceful behavior. Although the facts of this case may be tough for some readers to hear, the decision is an important one that offers some insight into what prosecutors, judges, and juries mean when they say “sexual battery.”The defendant was living in Broward County with his daughter and her boyfriend when the boyfriend’s twin nine-year-old nieces came to visit the home. At some point while her mother was taking a nap, one of the girls went into the defendant’s bed with him. The girl later testified that he pulled her pants down, pulled his own pants down, and rolled over toward her. The girl tried unsuccessfully to get away. Her sister then came into the room and also tried to help the girl get away.

“Although at trial the victim stated that [the defendant]’s penis ‘touched’ her ‘butt,’ he victim told others shortly after the incident occurred that [he] had put his penis ‘in her butt,’” according to the court. A medical examination following the incident did not show any signs of injury but did uncover semen near the girl’s anus and vagina. DNA testing showed it was the defendant’s semen. He was charged with sexual battery on a minor and convicted of the crime following a jury trial.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

A high-profile Pinellas County murder case recently got new life from the Florida Supreme Court. The decision is a good example of how seriously courts take murder charges, and also of the strict legal requirements that have to be met before a person can be sentenced to death.The defendant was charged in 2006 with the murder of two victims. He had worked as the couple’s personal fitness trainer and allegedly murdered the couple during a robbery in which he stole a safe containing $88,000 in cash. The couple was stabbed to death, and their home was set on fire after the robbery. A jury trial took place in 2010, at the close of which the jury convicted the defendant on two counts of first-degree murder. During a separate penalty phase of the trial, the 12-member jury voted 7-5 in favor of recommending the death sentence. Although the defendant’s lawyers presented evidence showing that he suffered from extreme mental and emotional impairments, the judge declined to mitigate his sentence. Instead, the judge sentenced the defendant to death.

The defendant later appealed the sentence to the Florida Supreme Court, arguing that putting him to death under the circumstances was unconstitutional. The state’s highest court agreed, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Hurst v. Florida. In that case, the justices said that a jury, rather than a judge, has to find every fact necessary to impose a death sentence. A mere recommendation is not enough. When the Hurst case was sent from the U.S. Supreme Court to the Florida Supreme Court, the state justices added that the jury must vote unanimously in order to impose a death sentence.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Intent is a central part of many criminal cases in Florida, including those related to sex crimes. The trouble is that it can be tough to get inside a person’s head and determine what exactly he or she was thinking at a particular time. That is why cases such as these often revolve around communications evidence–emails, text messages, phone calls, and the like–to establish intent. A recent case out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit involving alleged sex crimes in Central Florida is a good example of how judges view that evidence.D.W. was arrested and charged with two counts of attempting to induce a minor to engage in criminal sexual activity back in 2015. Both of the charges stemmed from encounters with an undercover FBI agent who D.W. believed was offering to arrange for him to have sex with the man’s (fictional) daughter. D.W. responded to a Craigslist ad posted by a father and daughter seeking a sexual encounter north of Orlando. The undercover officer (going by the initials B.B.) responded to D.W.’s email and claimed that he was a 50-year-old man who was willing to arrange sex with his 12-year-old daughter. D.W. agreed to pay $40 for oral sex and asked to meet immediately, but B.B. told him that they had a prior engagement.

Three months later, D.W. responded to a similar post seeking to arrange sex with a 12-year-old girl. He was arrested after agreeing to pay for oral sex with the girl and arriving at a suggested meeting place. In total, D.W. sent 88 messages to the undercover officer in relation to the two internet posts. He was convicted on both counts and sentenced to roughly 18 years in prison.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Plea deals are an important tool for anyone facing criminal charges in Florida. These arrangements often allow you to avoid long, drawn-out court battles. They also give you the chance in many cases to lessen the impact of a conviction on you and your family. When considering these deals, however, judges still have some leeway to decide how the person involved in the deal will be punished for the crime. As a recent case out of Central Florida shows, one of the factors that federal judges consider in Florida white collar crime cases is the nature of the person’s role in the crime.The defendant was arrested in 2013 and charged with conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government, stemming from his alleged involvement in a tax refund and Social Security check theft scheme. Workers at two Tampa post offices gave the checks to a man who then turned the checks over to the defendant to forge signatures on them, according to the court. The other man paced the checks in individual envelopes, the court said, and put them in the mailbox outside the defendant’s home in Dade City. The defendant deposited some $260,000 worth of stolen checks into three bank accounts. The theft victims ranged in age and location, but several lived in Pinellas and Hillsborough Counties.

The defendant eventually reached a plea deal with federal prosecutors, in which he admitted to being involved in the conspiracy and was sentenced to 24 to 30 months in jail. The judge, as part of the sentencing, took into account that the defendant had accepted responsibility for the conspiracy and did not have a previous criminal record. He later appealed the conviction, however, arguing that the judge also should have further reduced his sentence because he had a “minor role” in the conspiracy.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Florida child pornogrphy laws can be a complicated maze, especially for someone who has never been charged with a crime before. One thing that anyone facing criminal charges in Florida – and elsewhere – should know is that the burden is at all times on prosecutors to prove that you committed the crime with which you are charged. In child pornography possession cases, for example, the authorities have to prove that the person charged actually possessed the illicit material. A recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit decision involving a Central Florida man is an example of how “possession” works in the internet age. The short answer is that if you have access to electronic files, you are likely to be considered in constructive possession of them.The defendant was living in Texas when the court said he received an email containing some 20 photos of child pornography. He moved to Tampa in 2012 to work on a shrimp boat and, soon thereafter, forwarded an email containing child pornography to another acquaintance. He was later arrested and charged with possessing and transporting child pornography. He was convicted on both counts after a trial in a federal court in Florida. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

The defendant later appealed the conviction, arguing that he should have been tried and charged in Texas, rather than Florida. He claimed the possession charge, for example, was based entirely on the email that he received while living in the Lone Star State. The Eleventh Circuit disagreed. Regardless of where he was living when he received the original email, the court said the jury could have found that he possessed other child pornography after that time, while living in Florida. He was living in Tampa when he sent at least one illicit photo, meaning that he was in possession of it in Florida at the time.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Florida police and courts take driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol very seriously. A DUI conviction can come with stiff penalties, including jail time, heavy fines, and the loss of driving privileges. The consequences of a conviction are particularly severe in cases involving repeat offenders and those in which the person charged caused an accident while they were intoxicated behind the wheel. Just take the recent case of a Clearwater man whom a federal court recently decided will be staying in jail for decades.The case centered on an accident that happened in April 2010. Clearwater police were after the defendant on an unrelated misdemeanor warrant and received a tip that he was hanging out at a local bar. An officer observed the defendant’s truck in the bar parking lot and pulled the truck over shortly after he saw the defendant leave in it. When the officer approached the vehicle, however, the defendant sped away. A chase ensued, during which the defendant ran a red light and collided with a taxi cab. The cab driver died in the accident.

The defendant, whose driver’s license had already been revoked, was taken to a hospital, where a blood test showed that he had a blood alcohol content of about 0.17 percent, more than twice the legal limit. He was convicted of DUI manslaughter and other offenses and sentenced to 20 years in jail. He later asked the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida to scrap the conviction. He argued that prospective jurors in the case had inappropriate conversations with a representative of Mothers Against Drunk Driving and the cab driver’s family, in which they discussed some of his previous convictions for DUI.

Continue reading →

by
Posted in: DUI
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

As with many crimes, Florida drug possession can be prosecuted in a variety of different ways. It’s clear that if a person is arrested with contraband on his or her person, that might be used as evidence to prove the crime. However, what happens when the drug is present in an area where you are present, but it’s not actually on your person? It’s still possible for the State to seek a conviction under those circumstances based on what is known as “constructive possession.” A November 15, 2017 case, decided by the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals, reversed the acquittal of the criminal defendant after the appeals court ruled that there was enough evidence to uphold the jury’s finding of possession of cocaine.

The defendant’s car was stopped after he was spotted parked in front of a house where a man walked up to the passenger side of the car, stayed for a few minutes, and then left. The police searched the defendant’s car and found a small rock of crack cocaine on the sliding track under the driver’s seat. There was no evidence at trial that the defendant owned the car or that anyone else drove or rode in the car regularly.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty; however, the judge overruled the jury and acquitted the defendant because of a lack of evidence. The State appealed the judge’s decision.

Continue reading →