badge
badge

Published on: | by

In Florida, most DUI investigations start after a police officer observes the suspect driving erratically or violating a traffic law. However, some DUI cases start fairly innocently after a police officer is just checking to make sure a person is alright. Normally, a police officer needs to have reasonable suspicion that a person is committing a crime or probable cause to believe he violated a traffic law before the police officer can stop a driver. However, in some cases, a police officer can investigate if the circumstances indicate a person may be sick or in some kind of trouble.

In a recent DUI case near Jacksonville, Florida, a police officer observed the defendant driving a vehicle that was coming to a stop on the side of the road because it had four flat tires. The defendant was not breaking the law in any way, but the police officer stopped to see if the defendant needed any assistance. After talking to the driver for a few minutes, the police officer claimed he smelled an odor of alcohol and observed the usual signs of impairment from alcohol that the police officers always put in their DUI arrest reports. The police officer then proceeded into a DUI investigation and ultimately arrested the defendant for DUI.

The criminal defense lawyer challenged the arrest claiming the police officer did not have a legal basis to investigate the defendant for DUI or any other crime. The defense challenge was denied. Even where the police officer has no specific evidence of wrongdoing on the part of a driver, the police officer can approach a driver if it appears that he/she may be in trouble or otherwise needs assistance. If, at that point, it appears that the driver is drunk or is involved in any other criminal activity, the police officer can proceed with a criminal investigation.

Published on: | by

That question is too general to answer because it really depends on the circumstances of each case and what specific evidence the police officer has before he/she conducts a stop of a suspect. In our last blog entry, we discussed a case where a person was driving slowly and stopping in front of different houses in a neighborhood in which a lot of burglaries had recently taken place. The police officer stopped the suspect and arrested him for loitering and prowling which led to an arrest for burglary. It is possible that the initial stop was lawful, but the arrest for loitering and prowling was not because it was based on general suspicions rather than specific evidence.

In a similar burglary case near Jacksonville, Florida, the police officer was patrolling an area that also had a lot of recent burglaries. In the middle of the day, he saw the suspect wearing a hooded sweatshirt near the front door of a house in that area. He kept watching as the suspect walked around the house, opened a gate and walked towards the backyard. He appeared to cover his head with the hood as he did this. When the suspect walked back towards the front of the house, the police officer stopped him. The suspect named the person he was there to see, but that person did not live there. The police officer also observed that the suspect had gloves in his sweatshirt pocket. The police officer arrested him at that time. He later found evidence that the suspect had committed burglaries in the area.

The criminal defense lawyer challenged the initial stop of the defendant and the ultimately arrest. In order for the initial stop to be valid, the police officer must establish specific facts indicating the defendant was about to commit, or was committing, a crime, such as burglary or trespass. Mere suspicion is not enough.

Continue reading

Published on: | by

In a recent burglary and loitering case south of Jacksonville, Florida, the victim reported to police that a person knocked on his door asking for someone who didn’t live there and then left abruptly in a black vehicle. This occurred in a neighborhood with a lot of recent burglaries. The police responded to the area and stopped the defendant who was driving a black vehicle slowly in the neighborhood. The police officer stopped the vehicle and asked the defendant questions about why he was in the area and why he was driving slowly in front of the various houses. The police officer was not satisfied with the defendant’s answers and arrested him for loitering and prowling. The police officer then searched the defendant’s vehicle and found multiple items that had been reported stolen in burglaries in the area. He was then arrested for burglary as well.

The criminal defense lawyer challenged the charges arguing that the police officer did not have probable cause to stop the defendant, arrest him for loitering and prowling and then search his vehicle for evidence. In order for a person to be properly arrested for loitering and prowling, the state must show that the defendant’s conduct was unusual and indicated an immediate threat to the safety of persons or property. Vague suspicions are not sufficient for an arrest for loitering and prowling. A person driving slowly through a neighborhood and stopping occasionally may be suspicious, but is not a specific indication of a threat or criminal activity. Additionally, that behavior alone is not cause for alarm for public safety. As a result, the police officer did not have a legal basis to arrest the defendant for loitering and prowling. Since the initial arrest was unlawful, the search of the vehicle which uncovered the stolen items was also illegal. Therefore, the state could not use the evidence of the stolen items, and all of the charges were thrown out.

Published on: | by

In Florida, most DUI arrests occur after the police officer stops the driver for committing a traffic violation and then claims to make observations indicating the driver is impaired from alcohol or drugs. In the majority of those cases, the police officer works in the city or county where the initial stop is made and where the DUI arrest is made. For instance, most people stopped for a traffic violation and arrested for DUI in Jacksonville are stopped and arrested by a member of the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office (although the Florida Highway Patrol also can make stops as well). In Clay County, it is the Clay County Sheriff’s Office.

Can a police officer make a stop and a DUI arrest outside of his/her jurisdiction in Florida? For instance, can a Jacksonville Beach police officer stop a driver and make a DUI arrest in the city of Jacksonville? It depends. Generally, the answer is no. A police officer is limited to making stops and making arrests in his/her own jurisdiction. One exception is that a police officer can continue to pursue a driver into the next county or city when the initial violation occurred within his/her jurisdiction. The police officer is not required to stop at the county or city line when pursuing a driver who has committed a traffic violation. There also may be agreements between neighboring cities and/or counties that allow a police officer in one city or county to come over into the next city or county to pursue a person suspected of committing a crime or violating the traffic laws. If that is the basis for an out of county/city stop and arrest, the agreement must be disclosed to the criminal defense attorney and presented as evidence at the trial. If the police officer failed to follow the rules allowing intercity or intercounty stops and arrests, the criminal defense lawyer may be able to get the DUI or other charges thrown out. Also, if the police officer was unreasonable in following the suspect into another city or county, that may be the basis for a motion from the criminal defense lawyer to throw out the DUI or other criminal charges.

Published on: | by

White collar crimes are not formally defined, but they generally refer to crimes involving fraud, money, technology and/or a large number of documents. If a person steals enough money and happens to work on Wall Street, he/she has a good chance of walking away with a fine and a stern warning. But for the less wealthy and less connected, these crimes can result in serious prison time depending on the circumstances of the case, the number of victims and the amount of money involved.

Many federal white collar crime prosecutions are initiated by FBI investigations. The FBI keeps statistics regarding how many cases they are investigating and what types of cases. According to recent reports, the FBI is recommending fewer white collar crime prosecutions to the various United States Attorneys’ offices. The FBI is on pace to have 7% fewer white collar crime cases in 2013 than in the prior year. The number of white collar crime cases proceeding to prosecution in 2013 would be almost 50% fewer than ten years ago. However, with the advances in technology, it is hard to imagine that fewer white collar crimes are being committed.

In relation to Jacksonville, Florida, two of the districts with the highest percentages of white collar crime prosecutions from the FBI are nearby. The Southern District of Georgia ranks second in number of white collar crime prosecutions per capita from the FBI, and the Southern District of Florida ranks fourth.

Published on: | by

In Florida, it is illegal for a person who has been arrested or detained by the police to give false identification information to the police. This is a misdemeanor crime in Florida. This charge usually comes after a situation where the police either arrest someone or suspect someone is committing a crime and detains him/her. The police officer will ask the suspect for his/her name and perhaps date of birth to run him/her in the computer to check for outstanding warrants. If it is determined that the suspect gave false information, the police officer may arrest the suspect for providing false information to the police, among other crimes
However, this criminal charge will not be valid if the initial arrest or detention of the suspect is not legal. If the police officer does not have a legal basis to stop the suspect or arrest him and then the suspect gives false identification information to the police, the criminal defense lawyer should be able to get the charge thrown out even if the suspect did in fact provide false information to the police. Therefore, in a situation where a police officer suspects a person of committing a crime without specific evidence, detains that person and the person gives a false name, the person is not technically guilty of the crime because the initial detention would not be considered lawful.

Published on: | by

In most DUI cases in Florida, the police officer observes the driver violate some traffic law, conducts a traffic stop and then moves into a DUI investigation from there. There is usually no issue with the state proving the element that the defendant was driving or in actual physical control of the vehicle. However, in DUI cases involving an accident, the police officer normally arrives after the fact and does not observe the defendant driving at all. In these cases, the police need to use other means to establish that the defendant was driving the vehicle or in actual physical control of the vehicle. In many cases, the suspect admits to the police officer that he/she was driving the vehicle, and that could eliminate that particular defense to the DUI charge. Of course, we do not recommend admitting elements of a DUI or any crime to a police officer, but people do it all of the time.

When there is no confession from the driver, the police and the state may try to use other means to prove the defendant was driving the vehicle. If the defendant owns the vehicle and was in the driver’s seat when the police officer arrived, that is some evidence that he/she was driving the vehicle. Sometimes, the other person involved in the crash or other witnesses can testify they saw the defendant driving the vehicle. However, in some cases, there just is not sufficient evidence to prove the defendant was driving the vehicle when the police arrive after the fact, even if it seems obvious from a common sense standpoint.

Additionally, this is only relevant in a DUI case involving an accident. In such cases, the police officer can use other evidence, beyond what he/she personally observed, to prove that the defendant was driving the vehicle. In regular DUI cases without an accident, the police officer needs to actually observe the defendant driving or in actual physical control of the vehicle to proceed with a DUI charge.

Published on: | by

In Florida, most manslaughter charges involving auto crashes involve allegations that the defendant was driving the vehicle while impaired from alcohol and/or drugs and caused an accident that resulted in the death of another person. That crime is commonly referred to as DUI manslaughter. However, a person can be charged with vehicular manslaughter when he/she was completely sober if he/she was driving recklessly and caused a crash that resulted in a death.

In order to prove a case of vehicular manslaughter, the state must prove that the defendant was driving recklessly. The legal definition for reckless driving is driving with a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of other persons or property. Another way to describe it could be knowingly driving with a conscious indifference to the consequences and with knowledge that the driver’s actions is likely to result in injury to another person or damage to property. The bottom line is that these words do not mean much, and recklessness is determined by the initial police officer who makes the arrest, the prosecutor who decides to file the charges, the judge if the defendant files a motion to dismiss and ultimately a jury if the case goes all the way to a trial.

It is pretty clear that regular negligent driving is not sufficient for a vehicular manslaughter charge. Examples of mere negligent driving would include: running a red light, routine speeding, switching lanes without checking the mirrors and the fairly normal traffic violations people commit every day. It is when some of those improper actions are combined or the driving becomes particularly egregious that the line between non-criminal negligent driving and criminal reckless driving can be difficult to determine.

Continue reading

Published on: | by

In a marijuana and drug paraphernalia case near Jacksonville, Florida, the defendant was driving when a police officer decided to run his tag on the officer’s computer. The computer showed that the defendant’s tag was registered to a different vehicle. As a result, the police officer stopped the defendant and found marijuana and drug paraphernalia in his vehicle. The defendant was arrested. It later turned out that the DMV had incorrect information and there was nothing wrong with the defendant’s tag.

The criminal defense lawyer filed a motion to suppress the drug evidence found in the vehicle. In Florida, if the initial stop of a defendant is not valid, the general rule is that any evidence found as a result of that illegal initial stop cannot be used against the defendant in a criminal case. In this case, the criminal defense attorney argued that because the defendant’s tag was valid and he was not violating any traffic laws, the police officer did not have a legal basis to stop him. Therefore, the drugs and drug paraphernalia the police officer found as a result of the illegal stop should be suppressed. The state, on the other hand, argued that the police officer was merely using the information he had and did not know it was inaccurate so the stop was valid.

The case has not been finally decided yet. There is a case that suggests the stop could be valid if the incorrect information came from an agency that is not considered a “law enforcement agency.” In other words, since the incorrect information came from the DMV, which may not be considered a “law enforcement agency” under the Fourth Amendment, the defendant may not be able to claim he was unreasonably stopped by law enforcement. However, a later case seems to suggest that the DMV is considered a “law enforcement agency”, and therefore the Fourth Amendment could be used to invalidate this unreasonable stop. In that case, the criminal defense lawyer’s motion to suppress would prevail to throw out the evidence of the drugs and drug paraphernalia.

Continue reading

Published on: | by

Drug trafficking cases in Florida are very serious felony cases that come with significant penalties. These crimes typically have mandatory minimum prison sentences which means that if a person is convicted of drug trafficking, he/she will have to serve a minimum number of years in prison depending on the severity of the case unless the criminal defense lawyer can work out a different resolution. Some people might think that the crime of drug trafficking only applies to serious drug dealers who transport large quantities of drugs. That is not necessarily the case. Many drug trafficking cases involve drug users who happen to possess a quantity of drugs over the weight limit. In Florida, it does not take a large quantity of most drugs to reach the trafficking category since Florida drug laws are so harsh.

In many cases, the police seize multiple packages of a drug. For instance, if the police find a person with several different bags of suspected cocaine, can the police aggregate those bags together to reach the trafficking threshold? Does the state have to test each bag to make sure each bag contains cocaine?

In a recent cocaine trafficking case in Jacksonville, Florida, the Jacksonville police executed a search warrant at the defendant’s house and found nine separate bags of cocaine inside. The nine bags were later sent to the crime lab where drug identification tests are normally conducted by the state. The state combined the nine bags into one bag, the chemist tested the substance from that one bag and weighed it. The chemical test was positive for cocaine, and the weight of the combined bags was greater than 200 grams which makes it a serious felony cocaine trafficking case.

Continue reading
Contact Information
Jacksonville Office
121 W Forsyth St #520
Jacksonville, FL 32202
Office: 904-642-3332
Altamonte Springs Office
409 Montgomery Rd #115
Altamonte Springs, FL 32714
Office: 407-228-2019
Orlando Office
108 Hillcrest St, Office 2-1
Orlando, FL 32801
Office: 407-228-2019

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2024, Lasnetski Gihon Law
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design