Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the defendant engaged in sexually explicit online conversations with undercover Homeland Security agents posing as a thirteen-year-old girl. Between January and March of 2024, the defendant used the social media platform Kik to send dozens of obscene messages, photographs, and videos. It is alleged that he transmitted four pictures or videos depicting male genitalia and two videos showing adults engaged in sexual acts. The defendant repeatedly asked the individual he believed to be a minor to send nude images and attempted several times to arrange a meeting for sexual activity.

The post Florida Court Discusses Reasonableness of Sentence appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

The Trial and Sentencing

It is reported that the defendant and the victim, his ex-girlfriend, were estranged, and the defendant was subject to a restraining order that prohibited him from contacting the victim. He suspected that she was dating another man, and he ransacked her home while she was out. She called the police but declined to press charges. The following day, he attended a hearing on another criminal matter, then called the victim and spoke to her for several minutes.

Allegedly, the defendant then proceeded to buy ammunition, travel to the victim’s home, and shot the victim and one of her friends who was in the home with her. He attempted to shoot her boyfriend and another friend as well. He was charged with and convicted of multiple first-degree murder crimes and sentenced to death for each murder. He appealed, arguing in part that the trial court erred in instructing om and finding the murder was committed in a calculated, cold, and premeditated matter which constituted an aggravating factor and lead to his death sentence.

Aggravating Factors Under Florida Law

Under Florida law, in order to demonstrate the calculated, cold, and premeditated aggravating factor, a homicide must have been the result of a calm and cool reflection and not an act brought about by a panic, fit of rage, or emotional reaction. The defendant must also have a thought-out plan or design to commit the killing before the fatal event, and he or she must show enhanced premeditation. Finally, no moral or legal justification for the crime can exist.

In matters in which a defendant appeals a finding that a murder was calculated, cold, and premeditated, the appellate court will merely assess whether the trial court correctly applied the law and, if so, whether the evidence of record is sufficient to support the finding. Here, the court found that, based on the circumstances as a whole, the evidence substantially supported the finding that the murders were committed in a calculated, cold, and premeditated manner. Thus, the defendant’s sentence was affirmed.

Meet with a Knowledgeable Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney

Many violent crimes carry significant penalties, and it is vital for anyone charged with first-degree murder or another homicide to speak to an attorney as soon as possible. If you are accused of committing a criminal offense, the knowledgeable Tampa attorneys of Hanlon Law can advise you of your rights and aid you in seeking the best outcome available under the facts of your case. You can contact Hanlon Law via the form online or by calling 813-228-7095 to schedule a conference.

The post Florida Court Explains Sentencing in Homicide Cases appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the defendants, a doctor, pharmacist, and recruiter, were indicted for numerous crimes related to conspiring to receive healthcare kickbacks and paying and receiving such kickbacks. The matter proceeded to trial, and they were each convicted as charged. Following sentencing, they each appealed, arguing in part that there was insufficient evidence to convict them of the conspiracy charges against them.

The post Florida Court Discusses the Elements of Conspiracy appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

The History of the Case

It is reported that in 2015, the defendant was charged with receiving child pornography. He entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to 240 months in prison. He was also ordered to pay $20,000 in restitution to the victims harmed by his crime. In January 2021, the government filed a motion requesting that the district court issue an order allowing the Bureau of Prisons to turn over money in the defendant’s inmate trust account as payment towards the restitution he owed after the defendant received a $1,200 check from the government pursuant to the CARES Act. Specifically, the government sought $1,100 of the payment the defendant received. The defendant opposed the motion, but the court granted it. The defendant then appealed.

Enforcement of Restitution Orders in Criminal Cases

In cases involving child pornography crimes, restitution is mandatory. The appellate court explained that orders of restitution in such cases operate as a lien in favor of the government on all property and property rights of the person fined. Thus, the government can enforce a restitution order against a defendant’s property unless it falls under one of few enumerated exceptions.

The appellate court elaborated that if a defendant receives significant resources from any source, such as inheritance, judgment, or settlement, while they are incarcerated, the defendant will be required to apply the value of the resources to any fine or restitution they still owe. Based on the foregoing, the appellate court stated that it found no error with the trial court issuing an order determining that the stimulus check the defendant received from the government was a substantial resource that the defendant was required to apply towards his restitution debt. Additionally, the appellate court concluded that such payments did not fall under any of the statutory exceptions to enforcement of court ordered restitution. As such, it affirmed the trial court ruling.

Meet with an Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer in Tampa

Convictions for sex crimes often not only result in lengthy prison sentences but also can lead to the imposition of significant fines and restitution orders as well. If you are accused of committing a sex crime, it is in your best interest to meet with an attorney to assess what defenses you may be able to set forth. The experienced Tampa criminal defense attorneys of Hanlon Law can assess the circumstances surrounding your charges and craft persuasive arguments on your behalf. You can contact Hanlon Law via the form online or at 813-228-7095 to set up a conference.

The post Florida Court Discusses Enforcement of Restitution Orders in Criminal Cases appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

In a recent Florida judgment, the rules for considering a criminal defendant’s request to proceed without an attorney were explained. The defendant was charged with narcotics conspiracy charges. If you’ve been charged with a drug offense, it’s a good idea to talk to an experienced Florida criminal defense lawyer about your options.

The Trial of the Defendant

The defendant was accused of conspiring to possess narcotics with the goal to distribute them, as well as possessing narcotics with the intent to distribute and other drug charges, according to reports. He claimed that he would proceed to trial without the assistance of counsel, and he was found guilty as charged. He subsequently filed an appeal on many grounds, including that his waiver of his right to counsel was not voluntary or knowing. Upon reconsideration, the court dismissed his argument and upheld his conviction.

The Right to Counsel under the Sixth Amendment

The defendant had been appointed six counsel throughout the course of his proceedings, all of whom had been discharged, the court noted on appeal. He filed a motion seeking the court to fire his attorney and appoint fresh counsel after the most recent appointment of an attorney to defend him. The court refused the motion for lack of cause and warned the defendant that if he continued to refuse to work with competent counsel and to reject or renounce them, the court could assume that he was deliberately relinquishing his right to counsel.

The court regarded the defendant’s request to discharge his attorney as a motion to proceed pro se, and conducted a Faretta inquiry to determine the defendant’s understanding of his waiver of the right to be represented by an attorney. The Sixth Amendment rights were voluntarily and knowingly waived, according to the appeal court. Faretta enquiries, according to the court, are the best way to ensure that a defendant knows the consequences of waiving his or her right to a representation.

A court should advise the defendant about the nature of the charges, the punishments, and the dangers of self-representation during the investigation. The court noted that a similar investigation was carried out in the matter at hand, and that the defendant expressly declared his wish to represent himself. As a result, his convictions were affirmed by the court.

Meet with an Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer in Tampa

Drug accusations frequently entail severe consequences, therefore anyone accused of a drug offense should seek the advice of an experienced attorney. If you are charged with a drug crime, the experienced Tampa criminal defense attorneys of Hanlon Law can advise you of your rights and craft persuasive arguments in your defense. You can reach us via the form online or at 813-228-7095 to set up a meeting.

The post Florida Court Explains the Rights of Criminal Defendants appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.

Did you know that you can be charged with and convicted of drug possession even if a controlled substance is never actually discovered in your hands or on your person? 

It is called “constructive possession”—and it occurs when someone maintains control over a banned substance without having it within their physical grasp. 

The post Drug Charges in Florida: What is Constructive Possession? appeared first on Tampa Criminal Lawyer Blog.