Fort Lauderdale Criminal Attorney Blog

December 14, 2014

Report: Florida Cornerback Avoids Criminal Charges for DUI Hit-and-Run

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

In the wee hours of the morning in early October, the starting cornerback at Florida State University was returning from a celebration of his team’s victory. Meanwhile, in the opposite direction, a teenager was returning home from his shift at the Olive Garden.

The football player reportedly entered the oncoming lane. Both vehicles were totaled. While Florida law requires any driver involved in a crash to remain at the scene, the football player and his two friends allegedly fled on foot.

This was serious. First of all, DUI in and of itself is a considerable offense, punishable per F.S. 316.193 with up to six months in jail, a $1,000 fine and possible ignition interlock installation for a first-time conviction. Involvement in a wreck with property damage while drunk is a first-degree misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail. Causing serious bodily injury in a DUI crash is a third-degree felony, punishable by up to five years in prison. Then there is the hit-and-run aspect, which per F.S. 316.027 carries a five-year prison term if the crash resulted in injury and a 30-year prison term if the crash resulted in death.
Continue reading

December 7, 2014

Florida Domestic Violence Arrests Up Over Holidays

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

The number of domestic violence reports, arrests and shelter resident counts increase every year around the holidays.

Experts who study the issue point to a number of potential factors: More frequent bouts of depression, loneliness, family tension, alcohol consumption and more time spent indoors and at home. It’s also a time when estranged relatives, ex-husbands, ex-wives, ex-boyfriends and ex-girlfriends are more likely to be invited to family gatherings, and there is a heightened risk of a confrontation.

Additionally, no-contact orders are far more likely to be violated, as people try to set aside differences to make the holiday better for children and other loved ones. Unfortunately, even if both parties consent to the contact, it’s still illegal so long as the court recognizes the order as valid.
Continue reading

November 29, 2014

Florida v. Henderson – Court Rejects 4th DUI as “Isolated Incident”

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

A woman arrested for her fourth DUI while still on probation for the third had not committed an “isolated incident” warranting a downward departure on sentencing, Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal ruled recently.

It was the second time the case of Florida v. Henderson had been before the appellate court for sentencing issues.

The first time, the trial court sided with defense, ruling a downward departure sentence was warranted because of non-statutory mitigators. Appellate court disagreed and remanded. Then, trial court decided that because her fourth DUI was her first felony DUI, the incident was “isolated,” and therefore a downward departure sentence was allowed. The trial court imposed the original sentence. Appellate court again reversed, meaning defendant now faces up to five years in prison.
Continue reading

November 24, 2014

Ten Years Prison for Four-Time DUI Offender in Wrong-Way Crash

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

Many people think of a DUI arrest as something of an inconvenience. They know they’ll likely lose their license for a time, incur hefty fines and court costs and will probably need to hire a lawyer if they hope to negotiate lighter penalties.

However, for those convicted of multiple DUIs or for involvement in crashes that result in serious injury or death, the outcome is often much more grim. These are felony cases requiring intervention from an experienced and dedicated legal advocate.

Depending on the circumstances, defendants could face between 5 to 30 years in prison. These charges are not a mere inconvenience – they are potentially life-altering.
Continue reading

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