Archive for the ‘Florida Law’ Category

Are Drug Charges in Florida Really Unconstitutional?

Monday, October 17th, 2011

Cases throughout Florida may end up coming unraveled if judges take note of what courts in Miami and Manatee County have done recently with drug cases that have been ruled unconstitutional, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reports.

Cases of drug possession and drug sales may be dropped after Judge Mary Scriven, of the U.S. Middle District of Florida, ruled that Florida’s drug possession statute is unconstitutional because it lacks the element of intent — opponents argue that violates due process because it puts the legal burden on the defendant. Three circuit court judges have now asked the Florida Supreme Court to address the constitutionality question of Florida Statutes Section 893.13.

A Fort Lauderdale criminal defense attorney who is familiar with recent case law can often use evolving law to a client’s advantage. These precedent setting cases typically start at the trial-court level when a defendant and experienced lawyer see a legal issue that permits them to fight the charges.

In this case, the federal judge used a three-part test from the U.S. Supreme Court to analyze the statute: Whether the penalty imposed was slight, whether conviction resulted in substantial stigma, and whether the law regulates substantially dangerous or deleterious conduct. Clearly, a conviction of drug possession or drug trafficking fails this test.

The concept is simple: As the law stands, a UPS driver or U.S. Postal Service mail carrier could technically be charged with possession of prescription drugs if they are unknowingly delivering medicine to someone who doesn’t have a prescription. Obviously, that isn’t the intent of the law.

Thousands of drug cases swing in the balance as judges face the unconstitutionality of the law that currently guides them. Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Milton Hirsch has already cited the ruling in declaring the state law unconstitutional and dismissing 39 drug possession cases. In Manatee County, a judge recently dismissed charges against 42 defendants.

The Manatee judge wrote that there are many examples of a person being charged with possession of drugs, such as a roommate who has no knowledge that someone else has illegal drugs in the house. Lawmakers eliminated the intent part of the law in 2002.

Judges in other areas of the state are expected to take up the issue in the coming weeks as knowledgeable defense lawyers in Fort Lauderdale, Fort Myers use the ruling in the defense of clients facing drug charges in Florida. Meanwhile, the 2nd district court of appeal in Lakeland, Florida has sent a certified question to the Florida Supreme Court to ask the Court get involved and rule on the issue.

If you are in need of a defense lawyer, feel free to call our office to address any concerns you may have at 954.524.2424 in Fort Lauderdale or our Fort Myers office at 239.277.0005. The Garvin Law Firm has two locations to best serve the needs out clients throughout South and Southwest Florida.

Casey Anthony Trial: What the @#$! and Now What?

Thursday, July 7th, 2011

With the recent announcement of a not guilty verdict in the Casey Anthony trial, many onlookers are left to wonder how and why a case that seemed like a slam dunk could result in Casey Anthony walking free.

The backlash was seen not only in emotional crowds outside the courtroom, and across various broadcast channels, but with the advent of the internet and real-time sharing, many shared their opinions through Facebook, Twitter, and blog posts.

As referenced in the Palm Beach Post, the case was referred to as “the social media trial of the century.” Amy Singer, jury consultant for Anthony’s defense team, went on to say that at one point “over one million people were blogging about the trial, not including the thousands more who were either tweeting, texting, or discussing the case in online chat rooms.”

Many of these bloggers and influencers were convinced that Anthony was not only guilty, but they had actually come to hate her. It was unsurprising, when her verdict was read, that a general uproar and disappointment in our legal system came to light.

From this criminal defense lawyer’s perspective, however, our legal system did its job. What most people do not realize is that our legal system was designed under the premise that it is better for 10 guilty people to go free than convict a single innocent person. While our criminal justice system may favor the defendant by placing the burden of proof on the government, there are still many innocent people who are wrongly convicted. According to the Innocence Project, there have been 272 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States.

At any rate, this week’s jury’s verdict does not mean that Casey is innocent, only that she is not guilty. It means that the government was not able to prove that the crimes happened beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. When the prosecution brings a case against a defendant, it is their duty to prove their case. In the Casey Anthony trial, the prosecution failed to prove the charges, the charges that they selected and chose to file.

As in the case of the Duke Lacrosse Team, it is the jury’s duty to keep the government in check, and protected from over zealous prosecutors, who have the freedom to bring charges against anyone they choose.

While the verdict may not be a popular one, the jury did their job and followed the law after fully examining every piece of evidence that they and only they had the opportunity to view. Many people across the nation are incredibly angry with the result of this case and there is even a movement to pass a law entitled “Caylee’s Law,” making it a federal offense and a felony for a parent or guardian to fail to report a child’s disappearance to law enforcement.

As a final thought, (and especially if you weren’t happy with the verdict) make sure you show up next time you receive a summons for jury duty; I heard a judge once say that it’s the second most patriotic thing you can do for your country, besides serving in the military during a time of war.

Florida Law Attempts to Reign in Pain Clinics

Tuesday, September 28th, 2010

Nearly two years ago, a post here discussed the growing problem of unregulated pain-management clinics, so-called “pill mills,” and how South Florida – Broward County in particular – was ground zero.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, overdose deaths from painkillers are rivaling the No. 1 killer, traffic accidents. It attributes much of the increase to the overuse of prescription opiates such as OxyContin and Vicodin. In Florida, deaths from prescription-drug use rose from 2,780 in 2006 to 3,750 in 2008 – more than cocaine, according to the Florida Medical Examiners Commission.

You don’t even have to be a doctor to run a pain-management clinic. “You need a background check to get a liquor license — you can’t be a convicted felon and open up a bar — but you can be a convicted felon and open up a pain clinic,” says Broward Sheriff Al Lamberti.

Fort Lauderdale Drug Trafficking Attorney at Law

But starting Oct. 1, 2010, a new law will go into effect that takes steps to regulate the clinics and punish offending doctors, although some think it isn’t far-reaching enough.

“No bill is perfect, but this lets the Department of Health and the police regulate, inspect, shut down and discipline [clinics and doctors] operating blatantly outside the legitimate practice of medicine,” says Bruce D. Grant, director of the Florida Office of Drug Control.

The law allows police to inspect patient files for violations without a warrant and enforces penalties for doctors, who can be charged with third-degree felonies and fined up to $5,000 a day of violations. Every clinic must be directed by a doctor with a clean record.

In addition, clinics are limited to selling patients only three days of pills at a time, making it more difficult for dealers who pay patients to buy drugs (however, clinics can get around the rule by charging more for an office visit and giving the pills away, skeptics point out). In 2009, members of the Bonanno crime family were charged with using pain clinics to distribute prescription drugs.

Still, the bill does not require the clinics to do criminal background checks on owners and employees, as other health clinics must.

And although the state has approved a database to track pill dispensing, there is no dedicated, ongoing funding source. Bruce Grant said that more than $500,000 in donations has been raised to pay for the prescription-tracking program, with three months to go in the campaign. The goal is to raise $1 million.

Laws for drug possession and abuse have grown progressively harsher, while the source has not been adequately addressed; according to an FBI report, 82.3 percent of all drug arrests in 2008 were for possession.

Now South Florida’s nearly 200 pain clinics and dozens of OxyContin-dispensing doctors, which have operated with no legal scrutiny, will face some accountability.

Smile! You’re on Camera Running a Red Light

Sunday, September 19th, 2010

As of September 8, running a red light at some Broward County intersections will be captured on camera, and subject to a $158 fine.

In May, Gov. Charlie Crist signed HB 325 into law, authorizing local governments to use the cameras as enforcement devices, setting statewide standards and traffic fines for them.

The vehicle owner will receive a citation in the mail, but won’t be issued a traffic violation, so no license points; the owner can appeal the fine. The driver won’t be ticketed for rolling stops, or slowing down and approaching the intersection with caution. Drivers should note, though, that cities have 30 days to send the violations, so you could rack up multiple offenses that all arrive in the mail a month later.

Fort Lauderdale Red Light Camera Law FirmThe city of Fort Lauderdale has approved cameras in 10 locations and so far installed six.

Some Broward cities, including Pembroke Pines and Hallandale Beach, have been using cameras, and now must comply with the new state standards. That’s a plus – before the bill’s enactment, cities could fine anyone who didn’t come to a full stop before turning at an intersection with a camera.

Pines Mayor Frank Ortis, a big fan of the cameras, said that since one was installed at 129th Avenue and Pines Boulevard in 2008, there’s been a dramatic change in the incidence of red-light runners.

“My whole goal was to save lives,” Ortis said.

In fact, the bill’s proponents urged its passage as a life-saving measure. It is named the Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act for a Bradenton man killed in 2003 by a driver who ran a red light. Wandall’s wife, Melissa, has been pressing for the bill ever since.

“This bill will curb the behavior of red-light running,” she told the Sun-Sentinel in an interview after the bill was passed in April. “That’s what this is about, reducing crashes and fatalities at intersections.”

Using covers, tints, or any other tricks to obscure your license plate could get you in even more trouble than running a light; Florida law requires that your entire plate be visible, and use of covers is illegal on roadways.

Aventura was the first South Florida city to install intersection cameras, in 2008. In Broward, they’ve been approved in Hollywood, Davie, Coral Springs and, most recently, Plantation. Margate and Tamarac are also considering them.

Despite all this enthusiasm for the new law, the motive being purely about public safety has been questioned. In a recent editorial, Miami Herald columnist Daniel Shoer Roth expressed skepticism, pointing how expensive it is to appeal a ticket and nearly impossible to win, discouraging challenges.  He agreed with others who believe the real motive is an easy revenue source.

The roadblocks to fighting a camera-issued citation have not prevented challenges to the law’s constitutionality, although Crist has expressed confidence the state is on solid legal ground. Stay tuned.

Florida reinstates parental waivers, but are children protected?

Wednesday, August 11th, 2010

Back in 2008, the Florida Supreme Court ruled against parent liability waivers for a minor participating in activities at a commercial venue.

The wrongful-death case, Scott Corey Kirton v. Jordan Fields, involved 14-year-old Christopher Jones, killed in 2003 while riding an all-terrain vehicle at Thunder Cross Motor Sports Park in Okeechobee. His father had signed a risk and liability waiver as the facility required.

The high court’s ruling said the state had no statute supporting the waivers – and that wider public concerns cannot allow parents to waive the rights of minors to legal recourse when injury occurs. The releases served commercial interests more than the child, the court ruled, and the boy’s family was allowed to sue the track despite his father having signed the waiver.

The ruling set off a two-year battle between business venues, agitating to restore the waivers, and injury lawyers representing Florida’s children. Businesses, including Disney Florida Child Injury LawWorld, argued that the waivers were necessary to prevent frivolous negligence claims.

The Florida Justice Association, trade group for the state’s trial lawyers, countered that companies were shielded at the expense of innocent victims who might have to pay medical bills, and if they couldn’t, the cost would be passed on to taxpayers.

“Are we going to be a state that, public-policy-wise, says that we excuse negligent, harmful acts against children? That’s what it boils down to,” FJA President Michael Haggard told the Orlando Sentinel in 2009.

Last year the FJA’s opinion prevailed, successfully blocking legislation.

Not so this year. The Florida Senate and House unanimously passed SB 2440, reinstating parental waivers of liability for businesses, although neither side could claim outright victory.

The initial legislation, which would have allowed theme parks and various sports facilities to waive gross negligence, was replaced by a weaker measure that protects against “inherent risk,” a much lower legal standard.

It has been standard practice for recreational activity providers such as amusement parks and sports leagues to require waivers, who claim that absence of protection from liability could reduce the activities available to children and potentially affect tourist attractions.

But what about adequate protection for kids who play sports, go to water and theme parks, ice-skating and roller rinks, motocross tracks? When a child is injured, who bears the burden of proving what constitutes “inherent risk” could be put to the test and ultimately lead to another legal challenge of waivers.

To read the bill and its analysis, click here.

New Florida Seat Belt Law Goes Into Effect Today

Tuesday, June 30th, 2009

Until now, drivers could only be cited for not wearing seat belts if they were pulled over for something else, such as speeding.

That changes today with the passage of the Dori Slosberg and Katie Marchetti Safety Belt Law. With the passage of this new law a Florida driver who is not wearing a seat belt can be pulled over and issued a traffic citation for a nonmoving violation.

The state fine for a seatbelt violation will be $35, and each county may impose additional fines and court fees as well. Drivers and passengers who are found in violation of the new law are subject to a $114 fine in Miami-Dade County and $115 fine in Broward County.

This law is named in memory of two Florida teens that were killed in separate traffic accidents and died as a result of not wearing their seatbelts.

There are some exemptions to the new law, for instance a traffic ticket cannot be issued if an occupant has a doctor’s note, drives a trash truck, deliver newspapers, or is in the back of a pick-up truck.

Naples Criminal Defense Lawyer Prepares "Stand Your Ground" Defense after Shooting Death

Monday, March 23rd, 2009

According to the Collier County Sheriff’s Office, the shooting took place some time after 4 a.m. this past Friday when 44 year-old Sterlin F. Misener Jr confronted 19 year-old Patrick Hutchison after seeing the teen exit a camper that was parked in Misener’s Naples Driveway.

Misener told authorities that he awoke to the sound of a burglar alarm and shortly after saw Hutchinson exit a camper that was parked in his driveway. According to reports, a confrontation began and Misener stated that the teen lunged at him before he fired the fatal shot.

According to Florida Law, if a person has a reasonable belief that they’re in danger of death or great bodily harm, they can legally respond with deadly force. Further, that a person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm if the intruder had forcefully and unlawfully intered a dewlling, residence, or occupied vehicle.

The statute, enacted in 2005, goes on to state that a person who uses deadly force is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution.

Whether or not the camper parked in Mr. Miseners driveway will meet the definition of “Dwelling” is yet to be determined.

According to the Naples Daly News, Homeowners generally aren’t prosecuted, but a Hillsborough man was arrested on a charge of aggravated battery, was prosecuted, but won a motion to dismiss the charges. The prosecutor appealed and won in December 2007, when the Second District Court of Appeal ruled David Heckman was not entitled to immunity from prosecution under a statute that provides immunity when protecting a home.

The Hillsborough decision will not bar Mr. Miseners ability to use this defense as the two cases are quite different, but Floridians will have to follow this case for the final result.

For more on the Justifiable Use of Deadly Force Defense take a look at Florida Statute Section 776

.