Jacksonville Criminal Lawyer Blog

Two employees of the Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA) were arrested for grand theft after allegedly stealing reels of copper wire from the utility, according to an article on Firstcoastnews.com. The investigation began when another woman was apparently arrested in connection with $135,000 worth of copper wire taken from the JEA salvage yard.

Theft of copper wire has become a much more prevalent crime over the years in Jacksonville and throughout the country. As the price of copper wire went up in the U.S. and internationally (by more than 5 times in the mid 2000's), copper wire thefts have increased as well. One government study estimated that $1 billion worth of copper wire is stolen each year in the U.S. These thefts often occur at abandoned homes, warehouses and construction sites. Copper thieves look for copper wire in air conditioning units, exposed pipes and many other locations. However, stealing copper can be dangerous, as these people found out when they were electrocuted trying to cut through power lines made of copper.

In Florida, theft can be a fairly minor crime or it can be very serious with significant penalties. If the value of the property stolen is less than $300, the theft is a misdemeanor crime in Florida. Because copper is so valuable these days, most copper thefts of any significance will be well above that threshold. If the value of the property is $100,000 or more, the crime is grand theft and would be a first degree felony punishable by a maximum 15 years in prison. While most theft cases are misdemeanors or in the $300 to $20,000 range making the crime a third degree felony punishable by a maximum of 5 years in prison (but often resolved with minimal jail time or probation), copper theft cases can get over the $100,000 threshold and into the first degree felony range fairly quickly.

The Florida Highway Patrol received new information about a 2003 hit and run case that involved a fatality and are actively looking for their new suspect, according to an article on News4jax.com. The article indicates that an informant has given the police the identity of a man who was involved in an accident in 2003 that killed another man. The suspect then left the scene of the accident.

One question one may ask about this case is whether a person can be charged with a crime 7 years after the crime occurred. The statute of limitations can prevent the state from moving forward with charges if too much time has passed. The amount of time depends on the type of charges and certain other factors. However, when the crime involves a death, there is no statute of limitations in Florida.

However, in defense of the suspect, a criminal defense lawyer would obviously investigate why it took so long for this informant to come forward and identify someone 7 years after the crash. And, under what circumstances did this informant come forward? Is the informant facing charges of his own, and is he/she looking for some way to get a break from the state? Additionally, how good is the informant's memory, and what details can he/she remember 7 years later? Are there other facts that corroborate the informant's information?

Despite what may be shown on TV, it is not common for cases to be revived and arrests to be made based on new information several years after the alleged crime. However, it does happen, and there is no statute of limitations on death cases. But when it does happen, serious questions are raised about the reason for the delay and the strength of the evidence.

Police in St. Johns County, Florida arrested two people after conducting a search warrant in a home that resulted in the seizure of cocaine, marijuana plants and prescription pills, according to an article on News4Jax.com. According to St. Johns County police, they received anonymous complaints about the house and obtained a search warrant for drugs as a result. They apparently seized about $50,000 worth of illegal drugs in the house.

In a drug trafficking case like this, one of the first things a criminal defense lawyer would look at is whether the police had the right to enter and search the house. The police apparently had a search warrant, but that is not an automatically legitimate basis for searching a house. The search warrant has to be based on specific and reliable evidence that there is illegal activity taking place in the house. The article only references anonymous complaints about the house. The police may have had more specific information when they obtained the search warrant, but anonymous tips, without more, usually would not be sufficient information to obtain a valid search warrant. Anonymous complaints may be enough for police to initiate an investigation of the house, but without more specific evidence and corroboration of the anonymous complaints, the validity of the search warrant may be called into question. If the search warrant is found to be invalid in court after the criminal defense attorney files a motion to suppress, all of the drugs and other evidence found pursuant to the illegal search warrant would be thrown out of court.

A doctor in the pulmonary medicine department at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida was arrested for allegedly obtaining controlled substances by fraud, according to an article on News4jax.com. As criminal defense attorneys in Jacksonville, we have handled many cases involving obtaining controlled substances by fraud. What that charge typically means is that someone is suspected of obtaining prescription drugs without a prescription. As opposed to well know illegal drugs such as cocaine, crack, heroin, methamphetamine or marijuana, the drugs in these cases are often painkillers such as Percocet, Vicodin, Oxycontin and similar drugs.

These crimes most often involve people who have developed an addiction to highly addictive painkillers rather than people distributing or trafficking the drugs for profit. Quite often, the person developed the addiction after being prescribed the drugs after an injury or medical procedure and is unable to withstand the pain without the drugs after the prescription runs out. This makes this kind of crime less serious, in our opinion, than more traditional drug crimes.

However, the Florida legislature has enacted laws that provide for extremely harsh penalties for people charged with this kind of crime. For instance, it only takes a few pills to reach the trafficking in controlled substances threshold which, at the lowest level, carries a minimum mandatory sentence of three years in Florida state prison. For this reason, any charge involving obtaining prescription drugs or controlled substances by fraud must be taken very seriously and addressed at the earliest opportunity.

Law enforcement authorities in Jacksonville and throughout Florida made several arrests of convenience store owners for alleged food stamp fraud according to an article on Jacksonville.com. The article indicates that at least four Jacksonville convenience store owners were arrested for food stamp fraud relating to the Ethio Shell station and the M&Y Food Store and at least 17 more people were arrested across the state. The arrests were apparently part of an ongoing undercover operation into alleged food stamp fraud with more arrests likely according to the article.

The food stamp system in states across the country, also called the Electronic Benefit Transfer system, authorizes people to purchase certain items from stores that are authorized to accept food stamps. In the past, the food stamps were actual paper coupons, but now the system has been modernized so that people in the food stamp program get a card that looks like a regular credit or debit card.

Traditional food stamp fraud involves people lying on their application for food stamps and receiving the benefits when they were not entitled to receive them. However, in this case it appears that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) was looking into a different kind of possible food stamp fraud. Because food stamps are only permitted to be used for certain merchandise, it is against program rules and the law for food stamp recipients to use, and store owners to accept, food stamps for unauthorized items such as liquor, cigarettes and prescription drugs.

In this case, the FDLE is apparently alleging that store owners accepted approximately $3.5 million in food stamp benefits payments last year for unauthorized items and also skimmed cash from those food stamp transactions. The FDLE apparently used undercover officers to go into the various convenience stores and use the food stamps card to buy the unauthorized items and look for improper skimming by convenience store owners.

A recent client of the Shorstein & Lasnetski law firm asked whether a person can be charged with and convicted of a crime in Florida based upon words alone and no overt actions. The answer is yes. One example of a crime that can be committed based on words only is obstruction of or resisting a law enforcement officer without violence. This is a misdemeanor crime in Florida, but it is a first degree misdemeanor crime that carries a maximum penalty of one year in jail. A person commits the crime of resisting, or obstruction of, an officer without violence by resisting, opposing or obstructing an officer in the lawful execution of his/her duty without any violence.

This kind of crime is often committed by a person who physically resists an arrest by refusing certain commands of a police officer without being violent towards the police officer. However, it can be committed by using words alone. For example, if a police officer is lawfully searching for a suspect, lawfully arresting a person or lawfully seeking assistance and someone says something to the police officer to prevent him/her from performing the job, that person can be charged with obstructing/resisting an officer without violence.

An example occurred recently in a criminal case south of Jacksonville, Florida. The police officer had a court order to be served on an individual, and he had reason to believe she was in a particular apartment. The defendant answered the door and said the woman was not there and that he had not seen her for several days. The police officer soon learned that she was hiding in a closet in the next room. When he found her, she told the police officer that the defendant was covering for her. The defendant was charged with and convicted of obstructing the officer in his lawful duties.

In Florida, when a person obtains a driver's license and is afforded the privilege to drive, he/she impliedly consents to a lawful breathalyzer test. This does not mean that the police can lawfully ask a person to take a breath test at any time. It also does not give the police the right to force anyone to submit to a breath test. What it means is that if the police have probable cause to believe that a person is driving under the influence of alcohol to the extent that his/her normal faculties are impaired (i.e. DUI), the law says that the police officer can request a breath test and a person can be punished under the law for refusing the breath test. This punishment typically takes the form of a suspended license, but can be a misdemeanor crime in Florida for a second refusal.

However, assuming the police officer has probable cause to believe you are impaired, he/she still must ensure that your agreement to submit to the breath test is free and voluntary. The police officer cannot give you false information to trick or otherwise encourage you to submit to the breath test.

For instance, many people have a right to a hardship license after having their license suspended pursuant to a DUI case. In a recent case, the police officer gave the defendant false information about his right to a hardship license. For instance, if, in order to get the defendant to submit to the breath test, the police officer told the defendant that he is entitled to a hardship license if he agrees to the breath test but would not be entitled to the hardship license if he refuses the breath test, that would be inaccurate. In that case, the defendant's criminal defense lawyer would make a motion with the court to throw out the results of the breath test because the defendant's agreement to submit to the breath test was not freely and voluntarily obtained, which should invalidate the test results.

Based on the tone and substance of a recent speech and press release from Eric Holder, the federal government plans to step up investigations and prosecutions of medical professionals for health care fraud. Mr. Holder made it clear that the government considers health care fraud one of the country's "most destructive" and "widespread" challenges. As a result, the federal government has created a couple of task forces specifically conceived to deal with health care fraud cases. Mr. Holder is also asking state and local law enforcement agencies to assist the federal government in making health care fraud cases and make their own cases.

Health care fraud, also referred to as Medicare or Medicaid fraud, can take several forms. Some of the more common accusations of health care fraud involve claims that doctors are charging the government for medical services or equipment that were not necessary or doctors are charging the government for medical services or equipment that were not provided. Investigators will look for what they consider to be excessive or unusual billing practices when investigating health care fraud cases.

According to the government, approximately $60 billion in public and private health care spending is lost each year to health care fraud. As a result, the government is increasing its budget to fight what they perceive to be health care fraud. In 2010, the federal government increased the health care fraud budget from $200 million to $300 million. As expected, health care fraud cases have increased. In the six months prior to the speech and press release, 60 health care fraud cases were filed and over 200 people were charged with health care fraud related crimes.

When the government focuses on a particular issue, they will pump more money into enforcement and increase arrests and prosecutions. Often times, the wide net cast by the government to make these cases crosses the line between illegal fraud and honest mistakes and aggressive but legal business practices.

When people think of the crime of trafficking in illegal drugs and drug traffickers, they think of people moving large amounts of illegal drugs in and out of Florida. The people charged with drug trafficking charges in Florida are alleged to be major drug dealers because it is supposed to take a large quantity of illegal drugs to reach the level of trafficking. The crime of trafficking in illegal drugs such as cocaine and methamphetamine requires a large amount of drugs because the penalties associated with those crimes are very severe. Otherwise, for smaller quantities of illegal drugs consistent with someone who just uses them should come with more minor penalties.

For marijuana and cocaine in Florida, this is often the case. A person has to be in possession of more than 25 pounds of cannabis (marijuana) to be charged with trafficking in marijuana. It is difficult for someone to argue that more than 25 pounds of marijuana is for personal use. A person has to have 28 grams or more of cocaine to be charged with trafficking in cocaine. 28 grams does not actually appear to be a large quantity of anything, but it is certainly more than what one would consider a personal use amount.

However, for illegal pills that are obtained without the appropriate doctor's prescription, a person can have very few pills and be charged with the serious crime of trafficking. It only requires possession of 4 grams or more of pills such as Vicodin, Percocet, Oxycodone, Oxycontin and other similar pills to be charged with trafficking. While those pills actually have just a very small amount of the actual drug in them (most of those pills are comprised of other substances), it is the weight of the entire pill, not just the portion of the actual drug in the pill, that is relevant to the trafficking quantity determination. Four grams of illegal pills are not very much. If a person has a few pills without a prescription, he/she could be subject to a trafficking charge that comes with a minimum mandatory prison sentence of 3 years.

We think this part of the law is unreasonable. There are people who lawfully acquired pain pills due to injuries and other conditions who become addicted to them or otherwise need them to deal with constant pain. It does not take very many pills for that person to be considered a drug trafficker under the law. A person who brings bricks of cocaine into the state in the trunk of the case may be appropriately considered a drug trafficker. Someone who gets a few pain pills without a prescription to treat pain should not be considered a drug trafficker under Florida law.

In Florida, many drug cases begin when a confidential informant, or CI, provides information to the police about another person using, selling, trafficking or manufacturing illegal drugs. This often occurs after the confidential informant is arrested on his/her own charges and wants to make a deal with the police or the state to reduce his charges or sentence. The CI will provide information to the state, or perhaps work for the state by making a controlled drug buy, allowing the state to make a case against someone else.

When a confidential informant gives information to the police or the state that they use to get a search warrant, search a house for illegal drugs and then arrest one of the residents of that house, that other person will have a pending criminal drug case. Normally, during that trial, that defendant will have a right to see all of the evidence and learn of all of the witnesses that the state believes proves his/her guilt and that the defendant needs to prepare his/her defense.

Can the defendant's criminal defense lawyer force the state to disclose the identity of the CI? It depends. While the state is obligated to give the criminal defense attorney all of the relevant evidence in the case, the state does have a limited right to withhold the identity of confidential informants in some situations. The purpose of this rule is to protect and encourage people who provide information about criminal activity to the police. However, a criminal defendant has a Constitutional right to know of any and all information that helps the defendant defend him/herself against criminal charges.

Those two principles are balanced out in Florida law by requiring the state to disclose the identity of a confidential informant in two situations. First, if the state plans to have the CI testify against the defendant in a trial or pretrial hearing, the state must alert the criminal defense lawyer and disclose the identity of the CI so the criminal defense attorney has the chance to talk to the CI and see what he/she has to say. Second, the state has to tell the criminal defense attorney about the CI if failure to disclose the CI would infringe on the defendant's Constitutional rights. In other words, if the criminal defense lawyer can show that the CI is necessary for the defendant to advance a particular defense in the case, the state will likely have to disclose the identity of the confidential informant so the criminal defense attorney can adequately prepare that defense for the defendant. To conceal the identity of the CI when the defendant needs to know about him/her to defend him/herself would violate the defendant's Constitution right to confront witnesses against him/her and the right to a fair trial.