Fort Lauderdale Criminal Attorney Blog

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

September 10, 2014

Florida v. Parker – Motion to Suppress Order Reversed

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

A former Florida college student’s decision to speak with a detective regarding two alleged sexual assaults he allegedly committed at a party the night before will be used against him in court.

Initially, the trial court granted a defense motion to suppress those statements, meaning they couldn’t be used in court, on the grounds the detective failed to respond appropriately to the defendant’s question of, “Can you just tell me if I need a lawyer or something?” Now, that decision has been reversed by Florida’s 1st District Court of Appeal in Florida v. Parker.

Here’s a tip: If you ever are in doubt about whether you need a defense lawyer, get one. At least seek a consultation with an attorney. Our Broward County criminal defense lawyers know no good ever comes from a suspect asking a law enforcement officer for legal advice.
Continue reading

August 30, 2014

Drug-Free Zone Law Challenged in Florida’s 4th DCA

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

Drug-free zone laws in Florida are designed to make children and communities safer by limiting sales of illegal substances near schools, daycare centers, parks and churches. Per Florida Statute Section 893.13(1)(e), those caught selling certain narcotics within 1,000 feet of such facilities could face penalty enhancements. In some cases, it may be considered a first-degree felony, accompanied by a minimum mandatory 3-year prison sentence, regardless of one’s prior criminal history.

These laws are a holdover of the Reagan-era “War on Drugs,” and some states and municipalities have called for a repeal of these laws, as they are harsh, do little to curb drug crimes and are often applied inequitably. So far, however, our Broward criminal defense lawyers haven’t seen any indication Florida’s legislature intends to do comply.

Still, there are situations under which a “drug-free zone” enhancement can be effectively challenged. A recent example is an appeal before Florida’s 4th DCA of two defendants, tried jointly and convicted, of trafficking oxycodone within 1,000 feet of a church. The cases, Lemaster v. Florida and Wilder v. Florida, stemmed from a November 2011 arrests of two individuals on the first-degree felony charge of possession with intent to sell in, on or within 1,000 feet of a physical place of worship at which church or religious organization regularly conducts religious services. The pair were convicted of this and other charges.
Continue reading

August 20, 2014

Branson v. Rodriguez-Linares – Domestic Violence Injunction for Cyberstalking

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

A domestic violence injunction is intended in Florida as a means of protecting individuals from harm by those who have previously shown aggression or other dangerous tendencies.

Most often, people think of injunctions or restraining orders as being granted when a paramour physically attacks his love interest. It’s true this is often the case. However, what we are increasingly seeing is domestic violence injunctions granted in cases where no violence is reported, but rather the defendant is accused of “cyberstalking.”

Our Fort Lauderdale domestic violence injunction defense attorneys know the burden of proof is lesser with requests for protection than for criminal conviction. It’s not uncommon for an injunction to be granted, even when there is no criminal conviction or even arrest for the underlying actions alleged. With a cyberstalking allegation, it’s possible one could have an injunction against them without ever touching or even talking to the person filing the request.
Continue reading