Fort Lauderdale Criminal Attorney Blog

November 14, 2014

Long v. Florida – Felony Conviction Reversed for Inherent Prejudice of Jury

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

It’s inevitable that everyone carries their own personal feelings, attitudes and beliefs which color their perceptions of the world around them.

Jurors are no different. It is expected that attorneys and judges, though the voire dire process, will be able to identify some of those biases and determine as best as possible whether that person can still objectively evaluate the evidence.

But not all prejudice is internal. As the recent case of Long v. Florida reveals, external factors occurring at or during trial could improperly influence a juror’s decision.
Continue reading

November 7, 2014

Florida, Ohio Issue Conflicting DUI Breathalyzer Rulings

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

Florida and Ohio courts both recently were tasked with weighing the viability of breathalyzer results as key evidence in criminal cases alleging driving under the influence of alcohol. Both courts came up with different answers.

The news isn’t good for those arrested for DUI in Florida.

In Vuong et al. v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal was not swayed by the claims of 41 DUI defendants from Palm Beach County. They claimed the administrative code governing the state’s top law enforcement agency was too vague and failed to provide sufficient guidance for approval and use of the standard Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test instrument.
Continue reading

November 7, 2014

Enhanced DUI Charges Dropped by the Office of the State Attorney

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

supertroopers%20copy.jpg Hello folks,

It has been a long and hard week at the Ansara Law Firm. However, we are pleased to announce that all of our hard work has paid off today for our DUI Client. This client was arrested by officers of the Fort Lauderdale Police Department after he allegedly was driving “erratically” after leaving Fat Cat’s bar in Downtown Fort Lauderdale. These officers accused our client of running two stop signs, making an illegal left turn, and failing to maintain a single lane (swerving). This all occurred in the Himmarshee Bar District in downtown Fort Lauderdale.

Officer M. Wright ID #1782 believed our client was potentially DUI. Officer Wright decided to call the Broward Sheriff’s Office Deputy Ryan Clifton ID #16362 from the DUI Task Force. These Deputies are “specifically trained” to handle DUI investigations. The reality is that if you are subjected to an “investigation” by these guys you are likely heading to jail regardless of whether you are truly impaired. If anyone has a problem with that statement I would be happy to show them clear proof of individuals I have represented that were ultimately proven to have zero alcohol or drugs in their system and were still arrested for DUI. That is a fact folks and I can back it up.

Anyways to make a long story short Deputy Ryan Clifton ultimately arrested my client after he performed “poorly” on the road sobriety tests. He later asked my client whether he would perform a breath test. My client agreed and blew a .157 breath. That is almost double the legal limit!

October 30, 2014

Florida Supreme Court: Real-Time Cell Phone Tracking Without Warrant Illegal

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that real-time cellular phone site data is protected under Fourth Amendment privacy provisions. That means if officers don’t have a warrant to track your cell phone signal in real time, they can’t legally do it.

This clarifies privacy protections that were previously in question, and narrows the scope of law enforcement authority, which has continuously pressed for broader discretion in tapping into the wealth of data available from cell phone communications.

The decision reached in Tracey v. State, started with the drug-related arrest of a man, partially on the basis of information obtained from real cell-site location data pinged from his phone to local cell phone towers.
Continue reading

October 20, 2014

Florida v. English – Suppression Motion for Traffic Stop Reversed

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

One of the best ways people can protect themselves from arrest for DUI or drugs while driving is to minimize the chances of being stopped in traffic in the first place by keeping the vehicle in good working order.

When a vehicle is in a state of disrepair – even minor disrepair – it can form the basis for a legal traffic stop that can lead an officer to question your level of intoxication, the contents of your vehicle and your intentions.

We saw this recently in the case of Florida v. English, where trial court granted a defense motion to suppress when a traffic stop was based on a vehicle deficiency. However, that decision was overturned by Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal.
Continue reading

October 12, 2014

Anucinski v. Florida: State Supreme Court Remedies Improper Theft Convictions

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

Defendants can face theft and dealing in stolen property charges in connection with the same incident. However, Florida Statute 812.025 only allow defendants to be convicted of one of those two charges, when the alleged offenses are committed in connection with a single scheme or course of conduct.

However, appellate courts have continued to grapple with this issue, despite the Florida Supreme Court’s resolution in August last year with rulings in Williams v. State, Blackmon v. State and new proposed jury instructions in these cases.

In Williams, a defendant was charged with both theft and dealing in stolen property, and defense counsel requested special instructions indicating to the jury he could not be convicted of both. The court denied the request, the jury convicted on both counts, and the court subsequently dismissed one of the charges. A similar scenario arose in Blackmon. The Florida Supreme Court ruled the lower courts erred in failing to give a special jury instruction. The court further issued a standard special instruction in these cases, asking jurors to determine whether defendant is “more of a common thief or more of a trafficker,” based on defendant’s intent and use of the property after it was stolen.
Continue reading

October 1, 2014

Brown v. Florida – 3rd DCA Rules for Suppression Motion in Robbery Defendant Favor

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

One of the most valuable tools a Florida criminal defense lawyer can employ is the motion to suppress. If for any reason the evidence presented by the state was gathered improperly or is unreasonably prejudicial without being probative, a judge may grant a motion to suppress that evidence. What that means is prosecutors can’t use it against you.

In some situations, that will bolster a defendant’s credibility/chances of success. It gives defense lawyers more leverage to negotiate a lesser penalty in a plea bargain. It may result in one of several charges being dropped. It could even mean the state lacks sufficient grounds to move forward with the case in its entirety.

In the recent case of Brown v. Florida, Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal ruled an erroneous denial of defense motion to suppress required reversal of a robbery conviction and life sentence and a remand of the case for another trial.
Continue reading

September 26, 2014

Blood Evidence Questioned in Florida DUI Manslaughter Case

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

Five counts of DUI manslaughter have been dropped against a South Florida man accused of causing a crash while high on marijuana. Prosecutors simply said there was not enough evidence to support those charges, but the move comes after serious questions were raised about the veracity of the blood test analysis taken hours after the crash, while defendant was in the hospital.

The Riveria Beach crash suspect still faces five counts of vehicular manslaughter – and a possible 75-year prison sentence if convicted on each of those charge. But with the question of impairment now off the table, our Fort Lauderdale DUI defense lawyers know those charges too could be even tougher to prove.

The case first began last year, when the 22-year-old was allegedly high on marijuana while driving off an I-95 exit ramp onto Blue Heron Boulevard when he lost control of the vehicle and struck another, causing all five occupants in the other vehicle to crash and die. The deceased were all friends – a 14-year-old, two 17-year-olds and two 22-year-olds.
Continue reading

September 25, 2014

Florida v. Wiggins – Video in DUI Case Refutes Key Officer Testimony

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

More than ever, our criminal justice system relies on technology to aid in the fact-finding (or disputing) process. From DNA analysis to reviewing the contents on a computer hard drive, our Fort Lauderdale DUI defense lawyers know the ability to tap into technology plays a vital role.

However, it’s still not the only element courts will consider. Recently, Florida’s First District Court of Appeal weighed whether trial court’s review of a hearing officer’s decision to uphold a driver’s license suspension for refusal to submit to a breath or blood analysis was legally sound. Although one justice dissented, the court found the trial court erred in engaging in what amounted to a whole new review of the video evidence, as opposed to simply reviewing whether there was reasonable factual evidence to support the conclusion.

Although the driver’s license has been revoked, he may still have a strong chance of succeeding at his criminal trial with the discrepancies between the video evidence and officer testimony pointed out by the trial court in State of Florida, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Wiggins.
Continue reading

September 20, 2014

Lane v. Florida – 2nd DCA Suppresses Evidence in “Consensual Encounter”

By The Law Offices of Richard Ansara, P.A.

Consensual encounters with police have been the subject of numerous Florida court decisions and muchpublic debate. A central point in these discussions is whether such an encounter is ever truly consensual, where one of those parties is armed and has a great degree of authority.

Our Fort Lauderdale criminal defense attorneys know it can be difficult for the subject of these encounters to differentiate between a consensual encounter, where one is free to go, and a non-consensual encounter, where one is essentially detained.

The reason the difference is important is an officer does not need to have reasonable suspicion or probable cause to initiate a consensual encounter with a member of the public. Whatever answers or evidence you offer during these exchanges can’t be challenged on due process grounds because they were given of your own free will. If you aren’t sure whether a police encounter is consensual, the best way to find out is to ask, “Am I free to go?” If so, it is likely consensual. Take advantage of the opportunity to exit the scene, so as not to make any potentially incriminating statements.
Continue reading