The United States Constitution grants criminal defendants numerous rights to help ensure that they receive fair hearings. Among other things, the Constitution guarantees the right to a trial before a jury. As discussed in a recent Florida sex crime case, however, the right to a jury trial does not require a trial before a 12-person jury in most instances. If you are accused of committing a sex offense, you should talk to a Tampa sex crime defense lawyer about your possible defenses.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the defendant was charged with three sex crimes for offenses that occurred between March and May 2020. Florida law provides for a six-person jury in non-capital cases. The trial court empaneled a six-person jury as the defendant’s charges did not qualify for a twelve-person jury because the death penalty was not applicable to the offenses at the time they were committed. During the trial, the court granted the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal on one count of capital sexual battery.

Reportedly, the jury then convicted the defendant of one count of battery, a lesser-included offense, one count of capital sexual battery, and one count of lewd or lascivious molestation. The trial court sentenced the defendant to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the capital sexual battery and molestation charges and to time served for the battery count. The defendant appealed, arguing that the use of a six-person jury violated his constitutional rights, claiming he was entitled to a 12-person jury under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. Continue Reading ›

In Florida, the courts generally rely on sentencing guidelines when determining appropriate penalties in criminal cases. The courts can deviate from the guidelines, though, if they determine that doing so is necessary under the circumstances. Recently, a Florida court discussed the grounds for issuing an upward variance sentence in a robbery case in which the defendant appealed his sentence. If you are charged with a violent crime, it is smart to meet with a Tampa violent crime defense lawyer to determine your options for seeking a favorable result.

History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with attempted Hobbs Act robbery and using a firearm in relation to a crime of violence following an incident where, after accepting a ride from a driver, he attempted to rob the driver at gunpoint. A struggle ensued, and the defendant shot at the driver’s car as the driver fled, but no one was injured. The defendant pleaded guilty to the robbery charge, while the firearm charge was dismissed. The Presentence Report (PSR) calculated the defendant’s total offense level as 24 and assigned four criminal history points based on prior convictions, placing him in Criminal History Category (CHC) III, which resulted in a sentencing guidelines range of 63 to 78 months.

Allegedly, the government sought an upward variance due to the defendant’s escalating criminal behavior, while the defense requested a sentence within the guideline range. The district court sentenced the defendant to 120 months imprisonment, significantly above the guideline range, and three years of supervised release. The defendant appealed, challenging the calculation of his criminal history category. Continue Reading ›

It is not uncommon for verbal disagreements to become physical, which can ultimately result in criminal charges. In Florida, a person charged with assault or other violent defenses may be able to avoid a conviction if they can demonstrate they were acting in self-defense. If a court unjustly declines to instruct the jury on self-defense, and the defendant is convicted of a violent crime, they may have grounds for arguing the conviction should be vacated, as discussed in a recent Florida case. If you are accused of a violent offense, there may be defenses you can assert, and you should talk to a Tampa violent crime defense attorney promptly.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the defendant was charged with second-degree murder for the shooting death of the victim. The incident occurred after a prior dispute between the victim, the defendant’s girlfriend, and a neighbor. On the day of the shooting, the victim was attempting to contact his father, who had borrowed his truck, when the victim, his girlfriend, and their children drove to locate him. They encountered a vehicle driven by the neighbor, with the defendant as a passenger. The victim approached the defendant’s vehicle, and the defendant, claiming self-defense, shot the victim multiple times.

Allegedly, the defendant believed the victim was armed and acting aggressively, though no weapon was found on the victim. At trial, the defense sought to include a jury instruction on the justifiable use of deadly force, specifically requesting that aggravated assault be listed as a felony justifying such force. The trial court denied this request, instead allowing the inclusion of burglary. The defendant was subsequently convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to fifty years in prison, followed by lifetime probation. The defendant appealed the conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in excluding the aggravated assault instruction. Continue Reading ›

When attempting to demonstrate a defendant’s guilt in a theft crime case, the State will often rely on both direct and circumstantial evidence. In some instances, the State may attempt to introduce evidence of collateral crimes as well. Such evidence is only admissible in certain circumstances, though, as discussed in a recent Florida ruling. If you are charged with depriving another person of their property, it is smart to confer with a Tampa theft crime defense attorney regarding what defenses may be available.

History of the Case

It is reported that a jury convicted the defendant of first-degree grand theft and second-degree grand theft. During the trial, the prosecution introduced evidence of the defendant’s alleged fraudulent actions during her bankruptcy case, arguing that this evidence was relevant to the theft charges. Specifically, the prosecution presented a recording of a meeting between the defendant and the Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee, in which the defendant was confronted about not disclosing a property transfer in her bankruptcy documents.

Posted in:
Posted In:
Updated:

Pursuant to the Armed Career Criminal Act, people convicted of serious drug offenses may face enhanced penalties if they are later convicted of another crime. There is often a dispute over what constitutes a serious offense, however. Recently, the United States Supreme Court clarified the Armed Career Criminal Act, ultimately adopting a backward-looking approach. If you are accused of a crime and have a history of drug crime convictions, it is advisable to speak to a Tampa drug crime defense attorney about your potential defenses at your earliest convenience.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is reported that in 2016, police officers conducted a warrant-authorized search of the defendant’s home, where they found cocaine, scales, and a loaded firearm. Subsequently, the Middle District of Pennsylvania accepted the defendant’s guilty plea to one count of drug distribution and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm in July 2019. The Probation Office recommended sentencing the defendant under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) due to his five prior convictions: four for possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and one for delivering cocaine.

Following the disbursing of loans during the pandemic, the government began to crack down on people who they alleged fraudulently obtained COVID relief. As with all criminal cases, the prosecution must prove each element of a crime in COVID loan theft cases, and if they cannot, the defendant should not be convicted. In a recent Florida ruling, the court discussed the elements of identity theft, ultimately determining the defendant should have been acquitted. If you are charged with a theft offense, it is advisable to confer with a Tampa theft crime defense attorney to determine what steps you can take to protect your rights.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant was charged in a superseding indictment with nine counts of wire fraud and five counts of aggravated identity theft. The government alleged that the defendant engaged in a scheme to defraud the Small Business Administration and lenders administering the Paycheck Protection Program and Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program by submitting false and fraudulent loan applications on behalf of three entities. The defendant also allegedly forged signatures on documents supporting these applications.

It is reported that the defendant proceeded to a jury trial on all fourteen counts, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty on six counts: four counts of wire fraud and two counts of aggravated identity theft. The jury acquitted the defendant on the remaining eight counts. Subsequently, the defendant filed a motion for judgment of acquittal and a motion for a new trial, challenging the guilty verdicts on the grounds of insufficient evidence and legal errors. Continue Reading ›

People convicted of felonies often lose certain rights, like the right to possess a weapon. As such, if they are subsequently found with a gun in their possession, they may be charged with a crime. Additionally, depending on their criminal history, they may be sentenced as a career criminal. In a recent Florida gun crime case, the court discussed the grounds for deeming a defendant a career criminal before ultimately determining the defendant was properly classified. If you are charged with a weapons offense, it is smart to meet with a Tampa gun crime defense attorney to determine your options.

History of the Case

It is alleged that in 2021, during a traffic stop, the defendant was found in possession of a firearm and ammunition. He subsequently pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of federal law. Prior to sentencing, the probation office drafted a presentence investigation report that included an enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) due to the defendant’s three prior convictions for crimes that were either violent felonies or serious drug offenses.

It is reported that these convictions included two for aggravated assault in 2003 and 2015 and one for delivery of cocaine in 2007. The defendant objected to the ACCA enhancement, arguing that his prior convictions for aggravated assault did not qualify as violent felonies and his prior drug crime conviction did not qualify as a serious drug offense. However, the district court overruled his objections, deemed each conviction as qualifying under the ACCA, and imposed a 180-month sentence. The defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

People convicted of disbursing drugs often face substantial sentences. While a subsequent intervening change in the law may impact the grounds for imposing a sentence in a drug crime case, it can be difficult to establish that such modifications are grounds for a sentence reduction, as discussed in a recent Florida ruling. If you are accused of distributing narcotics, it is in your best interest to talk to a Tampa drug crime defense attorney about your possible defenses.

Case Setting

Allegedly, in February 2013, the defendant pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of federal law. He failed to self-surrender after missing his initial sentencing, leading to a sentence of 262 months of incarceration followed by five years of supervised release. The sentence was not based on drug quantity guidelines but on his designation as a career offender due to two prior crimes.

It is reported that the defendant’s incarceration term was later reduced to 192 months for assisting police in a homicide investigation. Having served over ten years of his 192-month sentence, the defendant, aged 38, is incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Bastrop, Texas, with a projected release date of May 24, 2026. While in custody, he faced over a dozen disciplinary incidents, including drug or alcohol possession and refusing work, with the most recent incident in April 2023. He then moved for a second sentence reduction. Continue Reading ›

People charged with violating Florida law often worry that they will inevitably be convicted. In criminal cases, though, the prosecution faces a high burden of proof, and there are frequently defenses criminal defendants can assert to establish that the prosecution’s evidence is inadequate to establish guilt. Similarly, if a person is convicted of a crime, they may have grounds for pursuing an appeal. In most cases, though, it is challenging for a person to convince the courts of their innocence without the assistance of an attorney, as demonstrated in a recent Florida ruling issued in a criminal case. If you are accused of engaging in criminal activity, it is smart to speak with a Tampa criminal defense attorney to gauge what defenses you may be able to assert.

History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant had a history of multiple post-conviction motions dating back to 1993 when he pleaded guilty to second-degree murder, burglary with assault, and arson, receiving consecutive sentences totaling sixty years in prison. Over the years, he filed numerous post-conviction motions, with this case being just one among many. Despite previous warnings from the court about the consequences of filing further meritless pro se cases, the defendant continued to submit additional filings.

Allegedly, the defendant, representing himself, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the court. The court denied his petition and issued an order to show cause why the defendant should not be prohibited from making further self-represented filings related to a specific lower tribunal case number. Despite being given forty-five days to respond, the defendant did not file a response. Continue Reading ›

The Florida and United States Constitutions aim to protect the rights of people charged with crimes. This means, among other things, that if the prosecution violates a person’s rights at any point in a criminal proceeding, such violations also may constitute grounds for challenging convictions that were the end result of such proceedings. Merely because a person disagrees with a jury’s verdict does not mean a verdict is unjust, however, as demonstrated in a recent ruling delivered in a Florida burglary case. If you are accused of burglary, it is smart to speak to a Tampa theft crime defense lawyer concerning your rights.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the State charged the defendant with burglary of an occupied dwelling with assault and was subsequently convicted of the lesser included offense of burglary of an occupied dwelling. He moved for acquittal prior to the verdict, but the trial court denied his motion.

Allegedly, the defendant subsequently filed an appeal, raising three arguments: first, that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, asserting that the State had not presented sufficient evidence of intent to commit an offense upon entry into the victim’s home; second, that he was entitled to a twelve-person jury under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution; and third, that the trial court erred in not granting his motion to correct a sentencing error regarding the imposition of a public defender fee.

Grounds for Reversing Convictions Continue Reading ›