Criminal Law
These are just some examples demonstrating our commitment to achieving personalized victorious outcomes for clients based on our vast knowledge of the real-life applications of Florida and Federal statutes and case law, along with significant in-court trial experience. Time is of the essence. Contact 954-888-8833 today to schedule a free confidential case evaluation.
—In State vs. M.S., when our client was facing a mandatory sentence of 30 years up to life, we successfully argued that the police department conspired together, falsely claiming our client tried using his vehicle to kill multiple police officers while fleeing and eluding arrest. The jury acquitted our client, and he was released that day.
—In Federal Court, the United States government has a 97% conviction rate. But in USA vs. M.G., we successfully argued to the court that the client was not guilty of United States Code 2251(a). This federal criminal statute alleges that a person “employs, uses, persuades, induces, entices or coerces,” a minor child to engage in any sexual conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction such as child video pornography. Despite testimony from the minor that the first thing the client said when meeting the child was “let’s make a movie,” the Court agreed with our argument that the sexual videos between the client and minor that were shared via our client’s cell phone were not created for the purpose of producing a visual depiction, such as child video pornography. Saving the client 15 years mandatory federal prison, the court found our client not guilty of United States Code 2251(a).
—In State vs. E.M., this DUI violated the probation for our client’s felony case where he was facing high prison penalties and mandatory deportation. Our client who had an ankle monitor on, was first tracked by his probation officer via, and found by police sitting drunk in the driver seat. When the police arrived, someone seen near the passenger ran off. Despite a video showing our client screaming obscenities directly into the faces of police officers, the jury agreed with our argument that the overzealous probation officer set our client up and that anyone could have been driving our client’s car.
—In Federal Court, the United States government has a 97% conviction rate. In USA vs. C.S., we successfully beat a 5-year minimum mandatory where our client ran nearly 700 pounds of marijuana from Jamaica to the Bahamas. He was stopped and arrested by the United States Coast Guard. The government argued our client was the captain of the vessel, and even though coast guards photographed our client at the helm, steering the vessel, we made legal objections to argue he was not the captain and won. Our client was facing up to 57 months, and we convinced the Court to sentence to 12 months and 1 day with credit time served. Client was able to be home for the winter holidays with his family.
—In Federal Court, the United States government has a 97% conviction rate. In USA v. R.B., we successfully argued for a low 3-year federal prison sentence for our client who was waving firearms within a music video with half a million views. Our client was facing 10 years before a long standing conservative Judge, and our client made the admirable decision to move forward with a plea negotiation and not take this case to trial. Despite the client being on film with the guns and amid allegations being a gang member, we argued at sentencing that the Court should accept the negotiated plea. The Court agreed with our argument, and authorized our plea deal.
—In State vs. O.I., our client was charged with a DUI that violated his felony probation where he was facing extremely high prison penalties. After preparing to conquer the case for our full-face tattooed multiple convicted felon to testify at trial, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty agreeing with our argument that the police used excessive force and targeted and profiled our client.
—In State vs. A.C., our client fell asleep on the side of the road, and admitted to police he had been drinking vodka. He failed the roadside field sobriety exercises and looked unbalanced on cameras. The jury agreed with our passionate argument that the client was an overweight man who was unbalanced on his feet and tired.
—In State vs. R.A., the law firm argued that our athletic client did not physically batter the alleged victim. The Court agreed with this law firm’s argument unveiling that the alleged victim who testified lied on the stand numerous times including by showing the Court photos of old injuries. After preparing to conquer the case, we prepared our nervous and traumatized client to testify. The Court agreed with the law firm’s argument that the alleged victim was lying and had actually attempted to rape our client. Case dismissed.
—In State vs. I.S., our client was arrested for an out-of-state warrant. Our client had never been to that state. We successfully negotiated with out-of-state police departments and district attorneys offices that their systems incorrectly had our client’s information. Those agencies agreed with us, dismissed charges in the other state, and did not oppose the immediate release of our client.
—In State vs. S.R., we successfully argued Miami Beach nightclub bouncers and owners conspired to falsely claim our client started a fight inside of a nightclub. This law firm proved the client had been battered by the bouncers, and the case was dismissed.
—In State vs. B.H., our client was arrested after being seen grabbing many car door handles and looking into the car windows down an entire block. Our law firm successfully argued that although that may have been true, the police department violated the client’s constitutional rights. Case dismissed.
