Pinellas County Florida Criminal Lawyer Blog

Although most of the rules in JUVENILE COURT are exactly like the adult laws, a violation of probation in juvenile court is called indirect or direct contempt of court.  This is when the kid violates a  rule of his probation which the court imposed.  In adult court, the probation officer files an affadavit of violation of probation citing which conditions were violated.  In juvenile court - the judge usually issues an Order to Show Cause, giving the kid or his attorney an opportunity to "show cause" as to why the kid shouldn't be held in contempt.  The difference between a violation of probation hearing and an Order to Show Cause hearing is mostly semantic.

But the penalties are very different.  And the Second DCA - which seems to get more conservative by the day - recently ruled that even though a juvenile's violations were of the same court order, and he pled to them at the same time, they could impose consecutive sentences.  The Rule of Juvenile Procedure, 985.037, says that on a juvenile's first violation, the maximum penalty is 5 days in JDC, a second or more violation can get you 15 days. 

In this case, called J.M v. Gargett, 2/23/2011, JM violated his probation by disobeying curfew twice and not following home rules, he pled to all three violations (which were in 3 separate orders to show cause) on one day and was sentenced to 5 days in JDC.  Interestingly, it looks like the trial judge, on his own motion, came back two days later, and added 15 more days to the sentence, reasoning that because there were 3 separate violations, he could add more time. 

In adult court, a judge couldn't do that for many reasons - first, if there was only one violation report, all violations would be included and it would be called "multiple violations of a single order."  But the bigger reason, and the one most concerning to me - is that a judge can't just resentence or modify a sentence on his own motion, unless is was an "ILLEGAL SENTENCE".  (there are many nuances not relevant to this blog to Criminal Procedure Rule 3.800.)  This wasn't an "illegal sentence."  Seems the judge may have taken advantage of the lax rules in juvenile court.

Secondly, the 2DCA's ruling is in direct conflict with a 5DCA ruling on the same facts.  So the case has been certified to the Florida Supreme Court to sort out.  I will be interested to hear what the Supreme Court says about this one. 

If you are arrested for any DRUG VIOLATION in Florida, the police have the RIGHT TO SEIZE your money, your car, or anything else which they can prove was used in furtherance of drug activity.

It known as the Floirda Contraband Forfeiture Act (Florida Statute 932.701-706).  Once the property is seized, unless you just agree to just give up your property, you are entitled to a hearing before a judge who can decide whether or not the police have "probable cause" to keep your things.  This is a Civil proceeding and really has nothing to do with your criminal case.  In fact, even if the criminal charges against you are dropped, they can still keep your stuff. 

In a recent case from Miami - Dade County, a trial court judge ruled that the police did not have "probable cause" to keep the $15,875.00 found on the defendant when he was stopped for illegal window tint on a rental car.  As many of us know, the stop for illegal tint was probably bad - but once again this was a civil proceeding where the burden of proof is lower. 

So the police stop this guy, he's the only one in the car, and smell the "odor of raw marijuana emanating from inside of the car."  They search the car, find a bag w/ $10,000 in "quick count bundles commonly carried by drug dealers" - whatever that means; find $5000 in one of his pockets and $875.71 in his other pocket - and, here's the clincher - he has no good explaination for where the money comes from. He says he owns a lawn business and was going to buy equipment.  (in a rental car?)  So after the trial judge says there's no PC - the State appeals and the 3rd DCA disagrees. (See Miami-Dade Police v. Forfeiture February 16, 2011)  Result - the guy loses his cash. 

But the reasoning of the 3DCA is what's significant.  The appeallate court says that because of the "aggregation of facts - even if each fact, standing alone, may be insufficient to meet the government's burden," was what provided the probable cause.  The point is, there were too many facts against the guy.  Maybe if he hadn't had the cash in "quick count bundles" he would have been ok.  Can anyone tell me what a "quick count bundle" is?  How else can you carry 10 grand in cash?

First off, I'd like to make it known that VERY few people are eligible for expunging.  Only when a person is arrested and the State chooses not to file charges, are you eligible.  There is an exception to this, but you'll have to call me to talk about it.

In order to expunge a record, there is a long process of paperwork, including certified copies, fingerprints, getting the State Attorney to agree, a certificate of eliigibility from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and eventually going to court and for a judge sign an order expunging the record. Technically, after all of that work, a judge does have the discretion to deny the Motion for Expunging the Criminal Record.  It rarely happens.

In Duval County, a man was arrested but never charged for Lewd and Lacivious molestation.  Since the State never filed charges, the man tried to get his record sealed.  The circuit judge denied the motion reasoning that the man worked in a car wash and would come in contact with children.  The man appealed and won.  The 1st DCA said that there was no reason to believe that the man, by nature of his job in a car wash, would ever be alone with children or work directly with children.  You can read the case here at the 1st DCA website.

Many people want their criminal records sealed or expunged, and it's difficult but not impossible to do.  If you think you are eligible, or would like to see if you are, call me. 

I understand domestic violence - I get why people stay together, when it appears to everyone that the relationship is destined to fail, why people go back to those who emotionally or physically abuse them, why domestic violence happens.   In my 10 years of experience, a true domestic violence victim doesn't call the police, the neighbors do, or an anynomous person does.  Only in very rare circrumstances does a true victim of domestic violence actually call the police.  And therein lies the problem.

Florida Statute 741.29 (4) (b) says that the officer shall determine who the primary agressor is.  When two people are drunk (which is the case in almost EVERY domestic violence case I've handled - whether prosecuting or defending), it's very difficult to tell who the agressor is.  A male will usually have scratch marks on them from female fingernails - bruises take longer to see.  So often, the police arrest the woman, making the almost always wrong determination that she's the agressor because the man has scratch marks.  Or, more often than not, the officer just takes the drunkest person to jail.  

The law encourages the police to make an arrest.  My suggestion is - walk away.  Better to risk a psycho on the road than the inside of a jail cell.  Because if someone calls 911 - 9 times out of 10, someone is going to jail.  And the law encourages that.

Here's the worst part of all this domestic violence nonsense to me:   The couple ALWAYS gets back together.    To risk copyright infringment and quote Enminem:  "when it's good it's goin' great but when it's bad it's awful, I feel so ashamed, I snapped- who is that dude, I don't even know his name?" "Next time - there will be no next time."  His latest video, with Rhianna is about domestic violence: wrong it is, how it happens, and how mixed up people's emotions are when it happens.   You can watch it on youtube.

If you are involved in any domestic violence incident - there's tons of help out there.  But the ultimate decisions lie with you.  If you are a victim or have been arrested for domestic violence, call me.  If I can't help you, I can point you in the right direction. 

In Largo, Florida, a mother and her son were arrested for aggravated domestic battery for admitting to hitting the daughter's fiance with a baseball bat.  The difference between regular domestic battery, which is a misdemeanor, and aggravated battery is the use of a weapon - in this case, the baseball bat.

It appears from the charge of domestic aggravated battery that the fiance was living in the house.  In order to have any domestic violence charge there must be a relationship between the parties where they either live together or they have a child in common, whether they were ever married or not.  Interestingly, while this case is pending, there will be a court order in place which provides for NO Victim contact.  If the fiance was living in the mother's home, he may be allowed to return there, and she may not.  Sometimes the results of the law are very unfair. 

According to the St. Petersburg Times, both the mother and son were being held without bail.  This is also a part of the domestic violence laws.  When anyone is arrested for domestic violence, they must stay in jail with no bond, until their first appearance hearing with a judge. In this case they were arreseted at 10pm Tuesday night, so they didn't see a judge until the next morning.  The judge gave the mom a bond of $2500, and she's out of jail. The son is still sitting in jail.

If you or someone you know is arrested for domestic violence - call us. 

I have noticed  recently that juveniles committing vehicle burglaries seem to be on the rise.  When I represent these juveniles, they almost always think that going into someone's unlocked car and stealing change or jumper cables is no big deal.

In a recent case in Clearwater, several 17 year old juveniles were arrested for auto burglaries.  The police served a search warrant on one of the kids homes and found items which matched the auto and home burglaries.  Chances are, because these kids were 17 years old, they will be charged as adults.  Whether or not a juvenile is charged as an adult is usually at the discretion of the State Attorney and depends largely on the juvenile's prior arrest record.

Here's the deal kids - it is a 3rd degree felony, technically punichable by up to five years in adult prison - if the State Attorney decides to prosecute you as an adult.  It doesn't matter if the car was unlocked - the fact is, it's not your car, or your things inside of the car.  As an aside, it's also a really good way to get yourself shot by the car's owner if they hear you outside of their homes.