Jacksonville Criminal Lawyer Blog

Jacksonville Sheriff's Office officers are out in force on holidays looking to stop drivers whom they suspect are driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs (aka DUI, DWI or drunk driving). This is particularly true in Jacksonville and Jacksonville Beach on New Year's Eve. Some of the more common areas where DUI police officers are prevalent are J. Turner Butler Boulevard (JTB), Beach Boulevard and Atlantic Boulevard. Police often look for drivers whom they believe are indicating signs of impairment, such as swerving, aggressive driving, excessive speeding or driving very slowly or driving in a manner that causes a motor vehicle accident.

If you are pulled over on New Year's Eve in Jacksonville, Florida (or any other time or place), keep in mind that you have rights. The officer may ask you to submit to a series of field sobriety tests. You do not have to submit to those tests. The officer may ask you questions about what you have been doing prior to the police stop and whether you have been drinking. You can politely request your lawyer rather than provide that potentially incriminating information to the police officer. If you do get stopped and arrested for DUI, it is important to contact a lawyer as soon as possible so your rights can be protected.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI

Bookmark:

Most people in Jacksonville and throughout Florida know that it is against the law to drive a vehicle without wearing a seat belt. A violation of this law typically results in a traffic ticket and a fine. It is also fairly common knowledge that many criminal investigations and arrests are initiated after a Jacksonville police officer pulls a car over for a traffic violation and then suspects that a crime is being committed by the driver such as a DUI (aka driving under the influence or DWI) or some type of drug possession.

However, what is not commonly known in Jacksonville and throughout Florida is that while it is illegal to drive without wearing the seat belt, a police officer may not pull a driver over for that reason alone. A seat belt violation is referred to as a secondary offense, which means that a police officer may only give a driver a ticket for that offense after the officer has stopped the driver for a different, primary offense, such as speeding or careless driving. As a result, under the current law, the fact that a driver is not wearing his/her seat belt cannot be used as a basis to pull a driver over and initiate a more serious criminal investigation into a crime such as a DUI or drug possession.

Florida lawmakers are proposing to change this law to make a seat belt violation a primary offense. If they are successful, police officers will have the authority to pull drivers who they have reason to believe are not wearing their seat belts. This would hopefully lead to fewer injuries and deaths resulting from accidents but would also likely lead to more DUI and drug arrests.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Procedure , DUI , Drug Crimes , Traffic Infractions

Bookmark:

Jacksonville police target specific times and areas to increase their presence and make arrests for DUI (aka driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs or DWI), other traffic violations and other crimes. For instance. Jacksonville and Jacksonville Beach police officers are often located on J. Turner Butler Blvd. (JTB), Beach Boulevard and Atlantic Boulevard near Jacksonville Beach looking for alleged drunk drivers on the weekends and Thursday nights.

Jacksonville Sheriff's Office (JSO) officers and Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) officers are going to be out in greater force this weekend, next week and next weekend because of the Christmas and New Year's Day holidays. They will be looking for drivers who are driving erratically, swerving, speeding, driving aggressively and/or otherwise showing signs of driving while impaired.

If you have been stopped by a Jacksonville or FHP police officer and he/she intends to conduct a DUI investigation, or if you have actually been arrested for DUI in the Jacksonville area (Duval, Clay, Nassau or St. Johns County), it is important to contact a criminal defense lawyer immediately who will help protect your legal rights. The attorneys at Shorstein & Lasnetski, LLC are available 24/7 at (904) 642-3332 over the holidays if you have any questions or run into any problems regarding a DUI or any other issues related to a criminal matter.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: DUI

Bookmark:

A Jacksonville Jaguar practice squad player (Travarous Bain) was arrested Saturday morning for driving with a revoked driver's license in St. Johns County, Florida, according to an article on Firstcoastnews.com. According to the officer, Bain was driving 99 miles per hour on State Road 16 near I-95 when he was pulled over.

According to the article, Bain's license was suspended pursuant to an earlier DUI change. To learn more about penalties resulting from DUI arrests and/or convictions, click here.

The article does not say what the speed limit was in the area where Bain was stopped, but he was fortunate that he was not cited for driving 50 mph or more over the speed limit. Due to a new law that has recently become effective, people who are caught driving 50 miles per hour or more over the speed limit face significantly higher fines and lengthy license suspensions for multiple violations.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Misdemeanor Crimes , Traffic Infractions

Bookmark:

Consider a scenario where a Jacksonville police officer suspects a person is involved with illegal drugs (such as marijuana, cocaine, heroin, ecstasy or methamphetamine) and enlists the help of a confidential informant (aka a CI) to set up a drug deal with that person. For instance, the Jacksonville police officer may ask the CI to ask the suspect to deliver a container with drugs to another person who happens to be an undercover Jacksonville Sheriff's Office officer. The police officer may encourage the CI to do this by offering money or a good deal on criminal charges the CI is currently facing. So, the CI approaches the suspect and tells him that the CI will give the suspect some money if the suspect takes the container, delivers it to another person and returns with the money the other person gives him. When the suspect delivers the container, he is arrested by the undercover police officer.

The suspect is then charged with a drug possession and/or distribution crime. At the trial, the suspect's criminal defense lawyer wants to know who this CI is so the CI can be questioned about the suspect's role in this incident. In Florida, does the State have to reveal the identity of the CI to the criminal defense attorney?

Normally, in a criminal prosecution in Florida, the State has a limited right to withhold the identity of a CI. Of course, if the State intended to call the CI as a witness at the trial, the State would have to alert the defense to that fact and give the defense the information identifying the CI. But assuming the State does not intend to call the CI as a witness at trial because the State feels they can prove their case with the testimony of the undercover officer alone, the criminal defense lawyer could still force the State to reveal the identity of the CI if he/she can establish that the CI is relevant and helpful to the client's defense. For instance, in this case, the CI may be helpful to establish two possible defenses. The first would be the defense of entrapment which is further discussed here. The second defense would be that the suspect did not know that drugs were in the container he delivered. The testimony of the CI could be relevant and helpful for either defense. If so, the defense may be successful in learning the identity of the CI and using him/her as a witness for the defense at trial.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Procedure , Drug Crimes

Bookmark:

Where a company employee commits a federal crime while acting in the course and scope of his/her job duties and acts with the intent to benefit the company, the company will likely be criminally liable for the employee's actions along with that employee. This is called vicarious liability, where one person's or party's criminal act confers liability upon a second, related person or party.

The standard for vicarious criminal liability in the federal criminal system is quite low. Basically, where any employee commits a criminal act while working pursuant to his/her job duties and the criminal act was done to benefit the company, the company will also be criminally responsible no matter where the employee fits on the company hierarchy and no matter what efforts the company undertook to prevent the criminal act. In other words, the employee who commits the criminal act can be the lowest level employee and the company can have a variety of strict and thorough policies and procedures in place to deter the criminal conduct, and the company can still face severe financial penalties for the employee's criminal act.

In the Second Circuit (New York), federal criminal attorneys are arguing to change this low standard which basically amounts to automatic criminal liability for a company if the the factors mentioned above are met. Pursuant to the case United States v. Ionia Management where a large commercial oil tanker company's employees dumped waste into the sea while shipping oil for the company in violation of federal criminal law, criminal defense attorneys are arguing that the standard for vicariously attributing criminal liability to a company for the conduct of its employee(s) should be raised to apply only where the employee(s) is a higher level, managerial employee and should take into account whether and to what extent the company had policies and procedures in place to try and prevent such criminal acts from occurring. This would not only allow for a more reasonable and considered application of corporate liability for the actions of employees but also encourage corporations to proactively deter employees from committing criminal acts.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Procedure , Federal Crimes

Bookmark:

A Missouri woman was convicted of three federal misdemeanor crimes for pretending to be a teenage boy, courting a 13 year old classmate of her daughter's and then sending abusive messages over Myspace to the young girl. Apparently, one of the messages sent by the defendant told the young girl that the world would be better a better place without her. The girl, who was suffering from depression, committed suicide.

As a result, federal prosecutors in Los Angeles, where the Myspace servers are located, charged the Missouri woman with three misdemeanor counts for violating the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Some were critical of these charges because the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act was originally conceived to deal with computer hackers, not people who send inappropriate and abusive messages over social networking sites like Myspace. This prosecution represented an extension of that law to include inaccurate information sent over social networking websites, which have become very popular with young people and are increasingly popular among older people and professionals. While this case was obviously an extreme example of Internet abuse with tragic results, it does raise the concern that prosecutors can use federal laws designed for another purpose to charge people with crimes for being abusive and sending out false information over the Internet. There is no specific federal criminal law that specifically addresses that type of behavior over social or professional networking sites

At the trial, prosecutors were able to use the fact that the Missouri woman violated the Myspace terms of service which require Myspace users to transmit accurate and truthful information. In addition to the fact that few people read the lengthy terms of service information before signing up for such a website, this also raises the concern that a private company is setting standards that can be used to substantiate a criminal prosecution. If the rules and regulation set forth by a website like Myspace can form the basis for a criminal prosecution, people should be notified as such before registering for the site. Additionally, if websites like Myspace have some influence over the standard to be used to define criminal behavior on their website, should such websites then have some obligation to prevent its users from committing those crimes on their websites. In other words, if a Myspace user is being verbally abusive towards another user, does Myspace have an obligation to monitor that activity and delete the abusive comments and cancel the accounts where the Myspace terms of service are being violated in such a way that criminal laws are possibly being violated?

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Federal Crimes

Bookmark:

In Jacksonville, Florida, it is not uncommon for a person to be arrested and charged for a possession of drugs (such as marijuana or cocaine) in addition to driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. However, depending on the circumstances, the prosecutors are not allowed to use evidence of one crime to bolster the other.

For example, in Jacksonville, Florida, a police officer reported that a driver was swerving on the road and pulled him over. The officer indicated that the driver smelled of alcohol and had bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. After the DUI (aka driving under the influence or DWI) investigation, the police officer arrested the driver because he felt the driver was under the influence of alcohol to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired. When a person is arrested, he/she will be searched by the police officer. In this case, the police officer found a small bag of marijuana on the driver. As a result, an additional charge of possession of less than 20 grams of marijuana (a misdemeanor charge) was added. If this case went to trial, should both charges be tried together?

A criminal defense attorney would likely decide to separate the charges so that two different juries decided the two different charges. This would be done pursuant to a motion to sever the two charges. Why? Because the defendant has a right to have a fair determination of his guilt, or lack thereof, on each charge. Whether the defendant was under the influence of alcohol and impaired while driving and whether he was in possession of marijuana are two different issues. However, if a jury heard evidence of both alleged crimes together, a jury could easily be prejudiced and let the evidence of one crime influence their decision on the other crime. In other words, a juror might assume that a person who drives drunk would be more likely to possess marijuana or a person who carries a bag of marijuana with him probably drives while impaired. This would violate the defendant's rights and be improper. As a result, those two charges should not be tried together.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Procedure , DUI , Drug Crimes

Bookmark:

Not necessarily; it depends on the circumstances. Consider a case in Jacksonville, Florida where a driver caused a serious motor vehicle accident. The Jacksonville police officer showed up and reported that this driver appeared impaired, unresponsive and subject to mood swings. At the hospital, a blood sample was taken from the driver, and the test results were positive for marijuana metabolites. Can the results of this blood test be used against that driver in a trial for driving under the influence of a controlled substance (also referred to as DUI or DWI)?

In this case, a criminal defense lawyer would argue that the existence of marijuana metabolites (as opposed to the actual parent drug) in a defendant's blood sample does not prove that the driver was under the influence of marijuana or otherwise impaired at the time of the accident. Forensic toxicologists would be used to testify that marijuana metabolites can remain in a person's system for days after marijuana use and far beyond the time when the effects of marijuana use have worn off. The issue at the DUI trial is whether the defendant driver was under the influence of marijuana at the time of the crash to the extent that his normal faculties were impaired. Since any marijuana use could have occurred days before the crash, this evidence of marijuana metabolites is marginally relevant to the criminal case, if at all. On the other hand, this evidence of marijuana metabolites in the defendant driver's system is highly prejudicial as it may lead jurors to assume the defendant was impaired or paint him as a drug user who was likely impaired or prone to commit such crimes. Because of the danger of this kind of unfair prejudice at the defendant's trial, the criminal defense lawyer should argue that this evidence should be excluded from the criminal trial as more prejudicial than useful to prove the elements of the DUI crime.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Procedure , DUI , Drug Crimes

Bookmark:

Jacksonville, Florida is the second worst city in the country in terms of fatal motor vehicle crashes involving teenagers over the holidays, according a recent report issued by Allstate Insurance Company. The bottom three spots were each held by Florida cities. The Allstate study looked at federal auto crash statistics and the claims for damages made to Allstate over the holidays for the last eight years. The statistics showed that teenagers were involved in more than 5,000 deadly crashes over the holidays during that time period in the U.S. Not surprisingly, fatal vehicle crashes are the number one cause of death among teenagers.

In contrast to the high number of auto accidents resulting in a death involving a teenager in Jacksonville, Florida over the years, Salt Lake City, Utah was considered the safest major city for teenage drivers with only four teenage deaths due to auto accidents over the holidays the last eight years.

Among other solutions, Allstate suggests that parents sit down with teenage drivers and discuss safe driving with them. To assist, Allstate has created a contract between the parents and teenage drivers that helps explain the issues involved with, and the importance of, safe driving.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Traffic Infractions

Bookmark:

Four Department of Driver Services employees in Georgia (similar to the Florida DMV) were charged with the federal crimes of identity theft and conspiracy to commit fraud after allegedly issuing false driver's licenses to over 130 illegal immigrants. According to an article at AJC.com, the illegal immigrants paid $7,000 - $8,000 to obtain a Georgia driver's license without having to take any tests or show proof of residency.

Additionally, the federal criminal defendants are also charged with issuing commercial driver's licenses (CDL) to themselves and one other person. A CDL allows a person to drive semi trucks or commercial buses professionally. Normally, a person has to take a test prior to obtaining a CDL to make sure the applicant can operate a semi truck or bus and understands the rules and regulations governing semi truck drivers. According to the federal indictment, the defendants manually recorded passing scores into the system for the CDL recipients bypassing the testing requirement. The recipients then went on to obtain jobs as bus drivers in 2007 for MARTA, which is the public transportation system in the Atlanta area.

Posted by Shorstein & Lasnetski | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Federal Crimes

Bookmark: