Avvo Rating badge
NACDL badge
Expertise badge
Avvo Rating badge
Expertise Best Criminal Attorneys in St. Petersburg
The National Trial Lawyers Top 100
Home

Posted In: | By

Sentencing in federal cases often involves balancing the severity of the offense with mitigating factors presented by the defendant. A recent Florida decision examined whether a 300-month sentence for the production of child pornography was substantively reasonable, ultimately upholding the district court’s judgment. If you are accused of a sex crime, you should consult a Tampa sex crime attorney to assess your rights and options.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the defendant secretly installed hidden cameras on his family’s property to record two children, ages eight and nine, in private settings. The first camera was concealed in an outdoor shower, where it captured the children changing clothes. The second camera was hidden in an electrical outlet in a child’s bedroom, set at an angle to capture inappropriate images. Additionally, law enforcement found evidence suggesting the defendant tampered with the images to magnify inappropriate details.

Reportedly, the children discovered one of the cameras and alerted adults, leading to the defendant’s confrontation and subsequent arrest. During the investigation, law enforcement recovered 775 explicit images and one video from the defendant’s damaged cellphone. The defendant later pleaded guilty to two counts of production of child pornography under federal law, each carrying a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years and a maximum of 30 years. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

In Florida criminal cases, evidence of prior bad acts is typically excluded to avoid prejudicing the defendant. However, such evidence may be admitted for specific purposes, like demonstrating intent or knowledge. In a recent drug crime case, a Florida court considered the admission of such evidence under Rule 404(b) and ultimately upheld the trial court’s decision to allow evidence of prior bad acts. If you are accused of committing a drug offense, you should consult with a Tampa drug crime defense attorney to evaluate your legal options.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant was convicted of several charges, including possession of controlled substances with intent to distribute and possession of a firearm as a convicted felon. The charges arose from a traffic stop and subsequent search of the defendant’s vehicle, during which law enforcement discovered firearms and various drugs.

Reportedly, the prosecution introduced testimony from a witness who claimed the defendant had sold him drugs numerous times before the incident in question. The defendant objected, arguing that the testimony was irrelevant to the current charges and unduly prejudicial. The trial court overruled the objections, finding that the evidence was admissible to establish the defendant’s intent and knowledge. After his conviction, the defendant appealed, challenging the admissibility of the prior bad acts evidence. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Criminal defendants have a right to be advised of the charges filed against them with ample time to prepare for trial. If the State amends the information charging the defendant shortly before trial, therefore adding a new charge, it may deny the defendant the constitutional right to prepare a defense and may be grounds for reversing any conviction arising out of the latest charges. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida case in which the defendant was charged with battery and later tampering with a witness.  If you are accused of battery or assault, it is smart to confer with a Tampa violent crime defense attorney as soon as possible to protect your rights.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the State charged the defendant with aggravated battery on February 10, 2021. The charge stemmed from a December 26, 2020, incident where the appellant’s girlfriend informed law enforcement that, during an argument, the defendant physically assaulted her. She claimed he threw her to the ground, placed his knee on her neck, covered her nose and mouth, and punched her, resulting in a lost tooth. The girlfriend later recanted her allegations, claiming her injuries were due to a car accident. Despite a no-contact order, the defendant contacted the victim over 4,400 times while awaiting trial, allegedly instructing her on how to recant her statements.

Reportedly, five days before the trial, the State amended the information to include a new charge of witness tampering based on these phone calls. The defendant requested a continuance to investigate the new charge, but the trial court denied the request. The defendant was subsequently convicted on both counts and sentenced to concurrent thirty-year sentences, with a fifteen-year mandatory minimum on the aggravated battery charge. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Under state and federal law, the courts must generally follow sentencing guidelines when issuing penalties for criminal offenses. In some instances, though, they can issue enhanced sentences that fall outside of the standard sentencing ranges, pursuant to the terms of the guidelines. For example, if a court determines that a defendant is a dangerous or repeat sex offender, it may find it necessary to impose greater penalties, as shown in a recent Florida ruling. If you are accused of committing a sex crime, it is in your best interest to speak with a Tampa sex crime defense lawyer about what defenses you may be able to assert.

Case Setting

It is reported that the defendant pled guilty to attempting to entice a minor and committing a felony crime involving a minor while being required to register as a sex offender. These charges arose from the defendant’s previous conviction in Florida for traveling to meet a minor after soliciting a guardian. The defendant had believed he was communicating with a stepparent of a minor child, discussing inappropriate matters, and sending explicit images.

Allegedly, however, the “stepparent” was an undercover law enforcement officer, and the defendant was arrested when they arranged to meet. At sentencing, the district court imposed a significant enhancement under the “repeat and dangerous sex offender against minors” provision due to the defendant’s prior Florida conviction. The court sentenced the defendant to 355 months of imprisonment, followed by a lifetime of supervised release. The defendant appealed, challenging the application of the sentencing enhancement and the overall reasonableness of the sentence. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

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 ›

Posted In: | By

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 ›

Posted In: | By

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 ›

Posted In: | By

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.

Continue Reading ›
By
Posted in: Theft
Posted In:
Updated:

Posted In: | By

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.

Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

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 ›