Home » Violent Crime

Articles Posted in Violent Crime

Posted In: | By

A document labeled as a death-penalty waiver can appear to settle the most consequential issue in a murder prosecution. But its meaning may depend on which charges it addresses and whether it reflects an actual prosecutorial choice. In a recent decision, a Florida court allowed a case to proceed as capital after finding that an administrative filing had been mistakenly extended to later charges. If you or a family member faces a murder charge, a Tampa homicide defense attorney can examine the charging history and the notices that affect potential penalties.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the defendant initially faced charges including first-degree murder and attempted premeditated murder. During his trial, two people were murdered, and the court declared a mistrial. A later superseding indictment charged him with those murders as well as the original murder and additional offenses. Prosecutors filed a notice seeking the death penalty under the newer case number, which was later consolidated into the original case number.

Allegedly, in March 2021, an attorney in the State Attorney’s Office filed a form announcing a death-penalty waiver during an administrative review of death cases. According to her affidavit, she understood the document to concern the original indictment and did not know about the superseding indictment or the newer death-penalty notice. She was not assigned to the case, and the filing bypassed the office’s usual evaluation and review process. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

A sentencing court must apply firearm enhancements to the count supported by the charging document and jury findings. When a judge mistakenly attaches a mandatory minimum to the wrong count, correcting only the favorable part of the error may leave another illegal sentence in place. This issue was addressed in a recent Florida decision involving transposed sentences for aggravated battery and the 10-20-Life statute. If you are facing enhanced penalties, you should consult a Tampa violent crime defense attorney about preserving objections and correcting an unlawful sentence.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the State charged the defendant with attempted second-degree murder in one count and aggravated battery with a deadly weapon in another. For the attempted murder count, the charging document asserted that the defendant carried and discharged a firearm and caused great bodily harm. The State sought a 25-year mandatory minimum under Florida’s 10-20-Life statute only on that count.

Reportedly, the jury found the defendant guilty of aggravated battery as a lesser offense on the firearm-enhanced count. Its verdict included special findings that the defendant possessed and personally discharged a firearm and caused great bodily harm. On the separate aggravated battery count, the jury returned a general guilty verdict without the special findings needed for the enhancement. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Murder-for-hire prosecutions represent some of the most aggressive uses of federal criminal law, often combining firearms allegations with expansive theories of interstate commerce to impose mandatory life sentences. In these cases, seemingly local acts such as driving a car or exchanging drugs can become the foundation for sweeping federal jurisdiction and extreme punishment. A recent decision from a Florida court demonstrates how courts apply these doctrines to uphold convictions arising from a contract killing carried out entirely within one state. If you are charged with a violent crime, you should consider consulting with an experienced Tampa criminal defense attorney to assess how evidentiary rules may affect your case.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the defendants were involved in a plot to kill a rival drug dealer in exchange for cash and controlled substances. The government contended that one defendant arranged the killing and paid the others money and cocaine to carry it out, also supplying a firearm to be used in the attack.

Reportedly, the shooting occurred on a public roadway when the defendants pulled alongside the victim’s vehicle and opened fire, killing two occupants and injuring a third. The government asserted that the roadway formed part of a federally designated highway system and that the defendants used a private automobile to carry out the killing. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Federal firearms statutes dramatically increase sentencing exposure when prosecutors successfully link a weapon to a qualifying crime of violence. Disputes over what offenses meet that definition often determine whether defendants face decades in additional prison time or even life sentences. A recent decision from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida addresses this high-stakes issue in the context of cyberstalking allegations that resulted in death. If you are charged with a firearm offense, it is wise to talk to a Tampa criminal defense attorney to understand how these classifications may affect your case.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the government charged the defendant in a superseding indictment with multiple firearm-related offenses, including discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, conspiring to use and carry a firearm during a crime of violence, and causing the death of a person during a crime of violence. Each of those charges depended on whether an underlying cyberstalking offense qualified as a crime of violence under federal law.

Reportedly, the predicate offense alleged by the government involved cyberstalking resulting in death, charged under federal statutes that prohibit using electronic communications or interstate facilities to place another person in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. The indictment alleged that the victim ultimately died as a result of the charged course of conduct. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

In Florida, certain repeat offenders may be sentenced more harshly under the state’s “violent career criminal” statute. When prior convictions are used to enhance a sentence, disputes often arise over whether those convictions qualify under the law. Recently, the Florida Supreme Court issued a decision that clarifies how courts interpret predicate offenses in violent career criminal cases, particularly where juvenile escape convictions are involved. If you are facing serious firearm charges or enhanced penalties, it is critical to consult with a Tampa criminal defense attorney who can evaluate your record and protect your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was convicted by a jury of being a violent career criminal in possession of a firearm. The incident arose in 2019 after the defendant allegedly brandished a firearm during an argument and discharged multiple rounds into the air.

Allegedly, the State sought to establish the defendant’s status as a violent career criminal by presenting evidence of three prior convictions: aggravated battery in 2012, burglary in 2005, and escape in 1995. The defendant did not dispute that the aggravated battery and burglary convictions qualified as predicate offenses under the statute. However, the defense challenged the use of the 1995 conviction, arguing it arose under the juvenile code and did not meet the statutory definition of “escape” for violent career criminal purposes. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Federal sentencing laws impose strict limits on the types and lengths of punishment courts may impose, even when the facts of a case are particularly egregious. A recent Florida decision issued in a violent crime case reaffirms the non-waivable nature of statutory maximum penalties and emphasizes the principle that sentencing authority is confined by congressional mandate, as the court vacated a 15-year term of supervised release, finding that the district court exceeded its statutory authority, even though the defendant purportedly “stipulated” to the excessive term. If you are accused of a violent crime, it is smart to speak to a Tampa violent crime defense lawyer about what measures you can take to protect your interests.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant engaged in a violent campaign of crimes against gay men in Miami while on probation. Reportedly, the defendant used a dating app to lure victims under false pretenses. On multiple occasions, the defendant brandished a firearm, forced victims into vehicles, and drove them to banks or stores to withdraw money or buy gift cards. Allegedly, the crimes escalated to physical assault, with one victim being beaten and another shot multiple times. The defendant reportedly made hateful, homophobic statements to his victims and expressed an intent to punish them for their sexual orientation.

It is reported that a federal grand jury indicted the defendant on 17 counts, including carjacking, kidnapping, brandishing, and discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence and bank robbery. The defendant pleaded guilty to all charges without a plea agreement. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

Federal sentencing laws provide mechanisms for defendants to seek reductions in their sentences under specific legal standards. When a defendant requests a sentence reduction, the court must evaluate whether extraordinary and compelling reasons justify such relief and whether the reduction aligns with sentencing guidelines and public safety considerations. A recent Florida case examined these factors when a defendant convicted of numerous violent crimes sought a reduction based on a newly proposed amendment. If you have questions about post-conviction relief, it is smart to consult an experienced Tampa violent crime defense attorney as soon as possible.

Facts of the Case and Procedural History

It is alleged that the defendant pleaded guilty to multiple federal offenses, including conspiracy to commit carjacking, carjacking, brandishing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, conspiracy to commit access device fraud, and aggravated identity theft. Reportedly, the defendant was sentenced to a total of 120 months of imprisonment. The sentencing court considered the defendant’s youth and background but determined that the statutory mandatory minimums applied significantly influencing the overall sentence.

It is reported that the defendant later sought a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), arguing that his age at the time of the offense warranted a downward departure under the newly proposed Amendment 829. Allegedly, the defendant contended that this amendment should be applied retroactively, asserting that his youth at the time of the offense should be grounds for a reduced sentence. Continue Reading ›

Posted In: | By

In criminal cases involving severe charges, the discretion of trial courts in sentencing and the imposition of probationary conditions often come under scrutiny. A recent Florida opinion examines these issues in the context of a second-degree murder conviction, shedding light on the boundaries of judicial authority. If you are facing criminal charges, it is crucial to consult with an experienced Tampa criminal defense attorney to ensure that your rights are upheld throughout the legal process.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the defendant was charged with first-degree murder but later pled no contest to second-degree murder with a firearm as part of a plea agreement. The charges stemmed from the defendant’s role in orchestrating the murder of the victim, who was the father of her child. Allegedly, the defendant hired another individual to carry out the murder, which occurred outside the victim’s residence while their child was asleep inside the home.

Reportedly, the plea agreement mandated a minimum sentence of 25 years but allowed the trial court discretion to impose up to a life sentence. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court considered evidence of the defendant’s role in planning the murder, as well as testimony presented by both the defense and prosecution. Ultimately, the court imposed a sentence of 53 years’ imprisonment followed by probation for life. As part of the probationary conditions, the trial court reportedly included several special conditions, such as prohibiting contact with the victim’s family, requiring completion of parenting classes, and mandating participation in GED or vocational training.

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

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 ›