Home » Defenses

Articles Posted in Defenses

Posted In: | By

Criminal prosecutions often raise complex questions about the scope of prosecutorial discretion and the constitutional protections afforded to defendants. One recurring issue involves how courts address double jeopardy concerns when multiple convictions arise from closely related conduct. A recent Florida decision highlights the limits of the State’s authority to dismiss charges after a jury has already rendered its verdict, underscoring the importance of procedural precision in criminal cases. This ruling serves as a critical reminder that even well-intentioned efforts to correct legal errors must comply with established constitutional and procedural rules. If you are charged with a crime, you should consult an experienced Tampa criminal defense attorney to protect your rights.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the defendant was charged with multiple offenses arising from conduct involving a minor, including traveling to meet a minor and attempted lewd or lascivious battery. The charges proceeded to trial, where a jury evaluated the evidence presented by both parties.

Reportedly, the jury returned guilty verdicts on several counts, including a charge involving the use of a computer to solicit or entice a minor to engage in unlawful activity. Following the verdict, the parties and the trial court recognized that one of the convictions raised a double jeopardy concern because it overlapped with other offenses.

Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Sentence-reduction motions under federal law often require courts to balance evolving sentencing reforms with the finality of criminal judgments. Defendants frequently invoke statutory changes and constitutional developments in an effort to obtain relief, but courts apply strict standards when determining whether a reduced sentence is warranted. A recent Florida ruling issued in a drug crime case demonstrates how difficult it can be to meet the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” requirement, particularly when the underlying sentencing framework remains unchanged. If you are charged with a drug crime, you should speak with a knowledgeable Tampa criminal defense attorney to understand your available options.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the defendant had a lengthy criminal history that included multiple state convictions for drug offenses and violent crimes spanning several years. These prior convictions ultimately played a significant role in the defendant’s later federal sentencing.

Reportedly, a federal grand jury indicted the defendant on charges including conspiracy to distribute cocaine, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense, and possession of a firearm as a convicted felon. The defendant entered a guilty plea to these charges.

Posted In: | By

When criminal defendants challenge their convictions, courts must carefully evaluate whether they received constitutionally effective representation and whether any claimed deficiencies truly undermined the reliability of the verdict. A recent decision from a Florida court illustrates how claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are analyzed when a defendant argues that jury unanimity may have been compromised by prosecutorial argument and verdict form structure. If you or a loved one is facing serious felony charges or considering postconviction relief, it is important to consult a Tampa criminal defense attorney who understands Florida appellate and postconviction law.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the State charged the defendant with sexual battery of a child based on conduct said to have occurred during two separate incidents in the fall of 2016. The charging document alleged a single count encompassing penetration that could have occurred either anally or vaginally within a defined timeframe.

Reportedly, the State presented testimony from multiple witnesses at trial, including three child witnesses. The primary victim testified that one incident involved anal penetration at the defendant’s home and that a later incident involved vaginal penetration. Two additional child witnesses testified to similar conduct occurring at the same location and described comparable statements made by the defendant when they told him to stop. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

When a defendant’s mental competence is in question, Florida law requires trial courts to make an independent determination before allowing a case to proceed. Competency proceedings safeguard a defendant’s constitutional right to a fair trial, and failure to follow these procedures can result in a conviction being overturned. A recent ruling issued by a Florida court in a theft case demonstrates how critical these protections are and illustrates the consequences when trial courts fail to properly address competency concerns. If you are facing criminal charges and have questions about your rights, it is critical to speak to a Tampa criminal defense lawyer promptly.

History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with grand theft auto. Before trial, the court appointed an expert to evaluate the defendant’s competence to proceed. This appointment was made after reasonable concerns were raised regarding the defendant’s mental condition. The record showed that the trial court had sufficient grounds to question whether the defendant fully understood the proceedings or could adequately assist in his defense.

It is alleged that despite appointing an expert, the trial court did not make an independent determination of the defendant’s competence before allowing the case to move forward. The case proceeded to trial, and the defendant was convicted and sentenced for grand theft auto. Following his conviction, the defendant argued that the trial court’s failure to make a required finding on his competency constituted fundamental error. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

In federal firearm and drug cases, defendants often face enhanced penalties if their criminal history includes certain violent or drug-related felonies. The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) imposes mandatory minimum sentences for repeat offenders, and courts regularly review whether a defendant’s past convictions meet the statute’s criteria. A recent Florida decision demonstrates how courts approach challenges to ACCA designations, especially when defendants argue that prior Florida convictions were improperly classified. If you are facing federal sentencing enhancements, a skilled Tampa criminal defense attorney can help you explore ways to challenge the underlying legal findings.

History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon The district court sentenced the defendant to 216 months in prison after determining that he qualified as an armed career criminal under the ACCA based on three prior Florida convictions: aggravated assault, aggravated battery, and cocaine possession with intent to distribute. The defendant appealed, arguing that each of these prior convictions was improperly used to enhance his sentence under the ACCA.

Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

When a person is granted a new sentencing hearing, it can feel like a rare second chance, a critical opportunity to seek leniency, highlight mitigating factors, and present a complete picture of personal growth. But resentencing also opens the door for courts to weigh new and potentially damaging information. In a recent Florida case, a defendant learned that subsequent convictions, even those for crimes committed after the original offense, can factor heavily in the trial court’s resentencing decision. If you are preparing for resentencing, it is essential to work with a Miami criminal defense attorney who can help you navigate the risks and opportunities that come with it.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the defendant was initially convicted in 2010 of three counts of armed robbery and one count of burglary, all stemming from a 2008 incident. The defendant received consecutive life sentences for the robbery charges and a concurrent life sentence for the burglary conviction. It is further reported that, on appeal, the burglary conviction was reversed, and the trial court later vacated the judgment and sentence for that charge.

Allegedly, in 2020, the defendant filed a motion for resentencing based on a corrected scoresheet that no longer included the vacated burglary conviction. The trial court granted the motion and held a resentencing hearing in July 2022. At this hearing, the State introduced evidence of the defendant’s subsequent convictions from a separate incident that occurred in 2009, after the date of the primary offenses but before the original sentencing. These offenses involved attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder against a witness in the 2008 case. 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

People accused of crimes when they are minors will typically be charged as juveniles. Juvenile criminal defendants have the same rights as adults, and the procedural rules for juvenile hearings are largely the same as those applied in criminal trials. For example, the courts will adhere to the Florida rules of evidence when determining whether to admit evidence at a juvenile delinquency hearing, as discussed in a recent Florida case. If your child was charged with a criminal offense, it is smart to talk to a Tampa juvenile crime defense lawyer about what steps you can take to help protect their interests.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is reported that the defendant, who was a juvenile, was residing at a group home when he was seen hitting another resident. Law enforcement officers responded to the scene, and the juvenile defendant was subsequently arrested. The State filed a delinquency petition against the juvenile defendant, charging him with one count of simple battery. At the final adjudicatory hearing, as the victim failed to appear, the State sought to prove the offense through alternative means, primarily relying on the surveillance footage.

Allegedly, two witnesses testified to authenticate the footage: a group home employee who retrieved the video and a police officer who viewed the footage and retrieved it from the IT personnel at the group home. The court issued a final order adjudicating the juvenile defendant delinquent for battery and placing him under the supervision of the Department of Juvenile Justice for one year. The juvenile defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in admitting the surveillance footage into evidence during the adjudicatory hearing. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Under Florida’s constitution, criminal convictions require a unanimous verdict. This means, in part, that jurors must be in complete agreement that the prosecution has established each element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is ambiguity regarding the unanimity of a verdict, a defendant may be able to argue that it should be vacated. Recently, a Florida court discussed what evidence a defendant must offer to prove a verdict was not unanimous in a case in which the defendant appealed his conviction for resisting an officer. If you are charged with a crime in Tampa, it is wise to speak to a Tampa criminal defense attorney to determine your potential defenses.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant was involved in an altercation at a bar, after which he spoke with police officers. He was taken to a hospital; when police arrived at the hospital, they found that the defendant had absconded. An officer found him lying on the ground down the road. The defendant and officer’s accounts of what transpired vary, but the defendant was ultimately charged with two counts of resisting an officer without violence. A jury found him guilty of both charges, and he was sentenced to one year for each count. He then appealed.

Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

In criminal cases, whether a defendant is found guilty typically hinges on the jury’s perception of them and the facts presented at trial. Thus, it is critical that the jury is comprised of impartial people who represent the defendant’s peers. If the prosecution uses a preemptory strike against a juror for impermissible reasons, therefore, it may violate the defendant’s constitutional rights. Recently, a Florida court discussed preemptory strikes of jurors in criminal matters in a case in which the defendant was convicted of murder and other crimes. If you are accused of murder or another violent offense, it is critical that you engage the services of a Tampa criminal defense lawyer as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is reported that the defendant and accomplices robbed a pawn shop and then fled from the police. The defendant ultimately entered the victim’s home and then drove the victim’s car through the garage door. The police arrested the defendant and then found the two victims murdered within the home.

The defendant was charged with multiple offenses, including two counts of first-degree murder. During the selection of jurors, the state used one of its preemptory strikes to remove a juror who, like the defendant, was black. The defendant’s attorney stated that the state’s reason for striking the juror was not sufficiently race-neutral. The defendant was convicted as charged. He then appealed. Continue Reading ›