We are still accepting new clients. We're also offering video conferencing.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted seemingly every aspect of society, including those who are currently incarcerated. In some cases, the pandemic serves as grounds for granting incarcerated individuals compassionate release. The courts do not readily grant compassionate release requests, however, and there are certain measures a party must take before a request is even considered. In a recent Florida opinion in a case in which the defendant was serving a sentence for a child pornography conviction, the court explained the grounds for granting compassionate release. If you need assistance with a criminal matter, it is in your best interest to speak to a knowledgeable Florida criminal defense attorney as soon as possible.

The Procedural History

It is reported that the defendant was charged with and pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography. He was sentenced to 180 months in prison in 2010. In May of 2020, he sought compassionate release, but his request was denied due to his failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. He then filed a second request, based on the fact that he suffered a COVID-19 infection and had asthma and probable lung damage. The court denied his motion, finding that once again, he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies.

Requests for Compassionate Release

The court explained that a court’s authority to modify a prison sentence is significantly limited by statute. Specifically, 18 U.S.C. 3582(c) enumerates the reasons a district court can modify or reduce a prison term once it has been imposed. The court explained that the only portion of the statute that applied in the subject case was the provision that allows a court to reduce a sentence when there is a compelling and extraordinary reason to do so. Continue reading ›

Battery is a serious charge, and a conviction for a battery offense can lead to significant penalties. Additionally, if a person with a battery conviction is later found guilty of committing another offense, it can lead to increased penalties. Generally, crimes are categorized by degrees, and convictions for more serious crimes can result in lengthy jail sentences. In a recent ruling, a Florida court discussed how prior record points are calculated for crimes that are not categorized by degree in a case in which the defendant argued his prior convictions for battery and other offenses were improperly assessed. If you are charged with battery or another crime, it is in your best interest to meet with a trusted Florida criminal defense lawyer to determine your options.

The Defendant’s Convictions and Sentence

It is reported that the defendant was charged with and convicted of three counts of battery and one count of kidnapping. He was sentenced to life imprisonment, and the sentence was affirmed by the trial court. In July 2020, he filed a motion arguing that the sentence of life imprisonment on the kidnapping charge was improper. Specifically, he asserted that his sentencing guideline scoresheet was improper because his prior convictions were from 1973, when Florida’s statutes for his prior convictions, which included battery, were not classified by degrees. Further, he stated that because the degrees of the offenses were ambiguous, pursuant to the applicable law, they should have been scored as third-degree felonies. The court denied his motion, and the defendant appealed.

Calculating Prior Offense Scores

On appeal, the court noted that Florida began classifying felony crimes by degrees in 1972. Further, the court explained that when a prior offense is not classified by degree, it is appropriate to score it by reference to the current, similar statute. Based on the foregoing, the court found that there was no miscalculation on the defendant’s scoresheet. Further, even if the scoresheet was recalculated, resulting in a range below life imprisonment, the sentencing court could have put in place the same sentence regardless, based on the defendant’s escalating pattern of criminal behavior. Continue reading ›

Many criminal statutes include an element of intent. In other words, the prosecution must prove that the defendant possessed the mental state needed to commit the crime to obtain a conviction. In child pornography cases that involve the use of technology and sharing of files, however, the prosecution may not be able to establish intent. In a recent Florida ruling, a court described what evidence is sufficient to demonstrate that a defendant charged with distributing child pornography knew or should have known he was committing a crime. If you are charged with a child pornography offense, it is prudent to meet with a skillful Florida criminal defense lawyer to discuss your potential defenses.

The Defendant’s Charges

It is alleged that a detective involved in investigating child pornography used a computer to communicate with the defendant’s computer. The defendant’s computer had a peer-to-peer file-sharing program that allowed parties to share torrents. When the defendant’s computer was running, it indicated that it had child pornography, and the detective was able to download two videos that contained child pornography from the defendant’s computer on two occasions.

Reportedly, the defendant was charged with the transmission of child pornography by an electronic device. He moved for an acquittal, arguing that the prosecution could not prove that he knowingly transmitted pornography. Following the trial, he was sentenced to eleven months in jail, followed by three years of probation. He appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion for acquittal. Continue reading ›

While ignorance of the law is generally not a valid defense, in many criminal matters, the State must nonetheless prove that the defendant meant to engage in criminal activity. Thus, if the State cannot establish intent beyond a reasonable doubt, it may be grounds for a non-guilty verdict or reversal of a conviction. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida case in which the defendant’s conviction for driving with a suspended license was reversed due to the State’s failure to prove he knowingly committed a crime. If you are charged with driving with a suspended license or any other offense, it is prudent to meet with a skillful Florida criminal defense attorney as soon as possible to assess your rights.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was stopped by a police officer, after which he was charged with driving with a suspended license and possessing marijuana in excess of 20 grams. Prior to trial, he moved for acquittal, but his motion was denied. Following the trial, he was found guilty as charged. He appealed his conviction for driving with a suspended license, arguing that the State failed to meet its burden of proof. Upon review, the appellate court agreed, reversing his conviction.

Proving the Offense of Driving with a Suspended License

Under Florida Statutes section 322.34(2), it is a crime for a person to drive with a suspended license. To convict a person of this offense, the State must establish each element as set forth under the law. Specifically, it must show that the defendant’s driver’s license was suspended at the time the crime was allegedly committed and that the defendant knew his or her license was suspended but drove a vehicle regardless.

Continue reading ›

Convictions for drug crimes often result in significant penalties. Additionally, if a person is convicted of multiple drug-related offenses, it may result in a sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), which imposes a minimum sentence of fifteen years. In order for the ACCA to apply, a defendant must have at least three prior convictions for serious drug offenses. The question of whether the purchase of a trafficking quantity of cocaine constitutes a serious drug crime as defined by the ACCA was recently discussed in an opinion issued by a Florida court. If you are charged with a drug crime, it is vital to retain an assertive Florida criminal defense attorney to help you seek a just outcome.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was convicted of a weapons crime and was subsequently sentenced under the ACCA. Specifically, the trial court held that the defendant had three prior qualifying drug-related convictions, one of which was trafficking cocaine in violation of Florida law. The defendant appealed his sentence, arguing that his drug trafficking conviction did not satisfy the ACCA’s definition of a serious drug crime. The district court was ultimately unable to resolve the issue and certified the question to the Florida Supreme Court.

Serious Drug Crimes as Defined by the ACCA

Under the ACCA, a serious drug offense is defined as an offense that involves the distribution, manufacturing, or possession with the intent to distribute or manufacture of a controlled substance. Thus, the court assessed whether trafficking cocaine in violation of Florida law satisfied the ACCA’s definition of a serious drug offense. The criminal statute in question listed six methods of trafficking, and the court noted that a violation of the statute would only be considered a serious offense if each of the alternatives met the definition.

Continue reading ›

In many cases, people who drive recklessly due to intoxication and ultimately cause another person’s death will be charged with DUI manslaughter. In some instances, though, people may be charged with DUI manslaughter, even if it is not immediately clear that impaired driving caused the accident and subsequent loss of life. In such instances, a DUI defendant may be able to argue that the prosecution cannot establish that there is sufficient evidence to establish guilt. In a recent Florida opinion, a court discussed what evidence the State must produce to establish a driver operated a vehicle while intoxicated, and in doing so, caused a fatal accident. If you are charged with DUI manslaughter, it is prudent to meet with a trusted Florida DUI defense lawyer to evaluate your rights.

The Fatal Accident

It is reported that the defendant was operating his ATV with his son riding on the back. They were on a rural road that had decreased visibility and no shoulder. At approximately 9:00 pm, the ATV tipped into a ditch. The defendant was able to get the ATV back onto the road, and he and his son got onto the vehicle and attempted to start it. A truck began approaching the ATV, and witnesses nearby tried to alert the truck to slow down and advise the defendant and his son to get out of the road.

Allegedly, the truck hit the ATV, killing the defendant’s son and injuring the defendant, who was airlifted to a hospital. The defendant admitted that he consumed alcohol, and a blood test revealed his BAC to be .16. He was charged with DUI manslaughter, and following a trial, was convicted. He appealed, arguing that the State failed to produce sufficient evidence to establish his guilt. Continue reading ›

In some instances, a court will sentence a defendant convicted of a crime to probation rather than ordering the person to serve a term in prison. If a defendant violates probation by committing a crime, however, the probation may be revoked, and a stricter penalty may be imposed. As in other criminal matters, the State must prove each element of the offense that allegedly constituted a violation in order for the defendant to be deemed guilty. Recently, a Florida court set forth an opinion discussing what the State must establish in order to prove a defendant committed criminal mischief in a case in which it was the basis for the revocation of the defendant’s probation. If you are accused of criminal mischief, it is prudent to retain a knowledgeable Florida criminal defense attorney to assist you in asserting a defense.

Factual and Procedural History

It is alleged that the defendant was convicted of multiple crimes, after which he was sentenced to probation. One of the conditions of his probation was that he was to live without violating the law. The condition stated that it was not necessary for a conviction to be obtained for a criminal violation to be considered a violation of his probation. While the defendant was on probation, he was accused of violating the conditions imposed on him by engaging in criminal mischief and other activities.

Reportedly, the violation accusations arose out of an altercation with his ex-girlfriend in which a vase broke. A hearing was held, after which it was determined that the defendant committed criminal mischief and other offenses. Thus, his probation was revoked. The defendant appealed, arguing the trial court failed to demonstrate he committed criminal mischief.

Continue reading ›

There are numerous laws in place to protect people from harassing behavior. For example, someone who is routinely subjected to threatening behavior can seek an injunction barring the aggressor from further contact. Injunctions will only be granted in cases in which there is objective evidence that it is necessary, though. Recently, a Florida court issued an opinion discussing the proof needed to demonstrate an injunction for protection against stalking in a case in which it ultimately reversed the trial court ruling. If someone is seeking an injunction against you, it is advisable to speak to a capable Florida injunction lawyer to discuss your options.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs and defendant owned neighboring businesses. They were involved in a dispute over property boundaries and the use of an easement located on the defendant’s property. They could not come to an agreement, and the plaintiffs filed petitions seeking an injunction for protection from stalking against the defendant. In support of their petition, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant harassed and stalked them by blocking their access to their property and yelling and screaming profanities at them. After an evidentiary hearing in which the plaintiffs stated that the defendant’s actions caused them stress and anxiety, the court granted the plaintiffs’ request and entered an injunction to prevent stalking against the defendant. The defendant appealed.

Grounds for Granting an Injunction

Under Florida law, a person who repeatedly harasses, follows, or cyberstalks another individual in a willful and malicious manner is guilty of the crime of stalking. The statute defines harassment as engaging in a course of conduct that is directed towards a certain person, that serves no legitimate purpose, and causes the person to suffer substantial emotional distress. Continue reading ›

Even though DUI is an acronym for driving under the influence, police can still make an arrest without proof of driving. Due to the severe consequences that these charges can have, it is important to understand the unique circumstances in which these arrests may occur. Plus, you will need the very best DUI defense Daytona Beach on your side. Continue reading to learn more about these important situations.

Being in control of the vehicle is just as important as driving it

What does it mean to “be in control” of your vehicle? This question is often the deciding factor for police when making DUI arrests of people in parked cars. Simply put, being in control of the vehicle means that you have the power and means to operate the car. If you are inside a car with its keys, police may determine that you are in control of it without so much as ever turning it on.

Contact Information