Articles Posted in Drug Crimes

Published on:

By

As criminal attorneys if we’ve heard it once, we’ve heard it a million times, “the defendant spontaneously admitted to the crime and also told me who is responsible for John F. Kennedy’s assassination.” Ok, maybe not to that extent, but I can’t tell you how many times I’ve read police reports, be it a DUI allegation or a Federal Wire Fraud report, where there is language that my client made admissions. Obviously many people get scared when they’re arrested and sing like canaries, but what about those that may be a little more “experienced” with the system and would never utter a peep to a police officer? What about those instances where a person “spontaneously” told the officer during a traffic stop that they have 14 tons of cocaine stashed in their garage 40 miles away? How can we as attorneys, or a jury really know what happened or what was said between the officer and the defendant without hearing a recording of the conversation?

I recently tried a Federal drug case where a DEA agent recorded in his written report that my client made certain statements that could be viewed as admissions and he later testified as to the same. Despite working for a Federal law enforcement agency with more than enough resources to buy recording equipment, this conversation was not recorded. As an attorney, without the luxury of any audio or video recordings to review, all you can do is try to chip away at the Agent or Officer for not making an effort to record despite the means to do so and attempt to the point across that one who is investigating a case certainly has an interest in the outcome and therefor has some bias. Unfortunately, often a showing of bias from the standpoint of a law enforcement officer and the fact that he didn’t record the conversation isn’t enough to combat Big Badge’s testimony. This happens every day in Courtrooms all across the country and the only way to combat it is to attempt to cross examine the witness and hope that they are taking their oath seriously. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. I’m not alleging that this agent wasn’t truthful in his testimony, however had the conversation been recorded my job would have been that much more difficult as it’s a hell of a lot harder to impeach a recorded conversation than a conversation that’s retold by a witness.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Ask any Tampa Federal Criminal Lawyer how they feel about Federal drug sentencing and I have little doubt the response you receive would be a groan and a look of disgust. Federal drug sentencing, for whatever popular and illusory reason the Federal Sentencing Commission chooses to hang their hat on, has been and is outrageous. For every crime there must necessarily be some kind of punishment otherwise the system is useless and we can cue anarchy. However, when one with little criminal history and no real ties to a cartel or gang takes a shot to make five times his yearly wage for a noble albeit illegal reason and ultimately is sentenced to a 10 year minimum mandatory prison term, have we really achieved anything? Should a drug sentence really be higher than a crime of violence or a sex crime against a minor? It doesn’t pass the smell test but it happens all the time. Title 21 of the Federal Criminal code details minimum mandatory sentences and it has been a leverage point of Federal Prosecutors since its inception.

Not only can a defendant be charged with a violation of Title 21 that calls for a mandatory minimum prison sentence, in certain instances the defendant’s sentence potential or mandatory minimum be increased because of a criminal history to make a minimum mandatory completely exorbitant. If the US Attorney’s office pops your man with a nice little 851 enhancement you are now staring down the barrel of a potential of a 20 year minimum mandatory or mandatory life sentence depending on the number of prior drug felonies he has. If the defendant was facing a 5 year minimum mandatory he is now looking at 10 and if there is no minimum mandatory, his statutory maximum increases. You can run but you can’t hide from the 851… All for one prior drug felony. Granted this enhancement is not automatic but it is wholly discretionary for the Federal Prosecutor. Depending on which Prosecutor is driving the bus, you could be in for a bumpy ass ride. This enhancement isn’t even inclusive of a Career Offender enhancement, and animal that has been criticized as not being based on empirical data by the Supreme Court in Kimbrough v. US, 552 U.S. 85, 109-110 (2007). When one is saddled with both an 851 and career offender enhancement his Federal criminal lawyer will earn a few more gray hairs.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Tennessee man Jerimiah Clyde Hartline, 19, was arrested on suspicion of grand theft, driving without a license and hit and run for stealing an 18 wheeler, crashing it, and causing a giant traffic jam in Temecula, California earlier this month. First off, sweet name. Only a guy with a name like this from the hills of the dirty south would have the presence of mind to commandeer a big rig to prevent a zombie attack. Excellent thinking Clyde. No, not really as this has Florida written all over it. Meanwhile, back at the ranch… According to the California Highway Patrol, Hartline informed authorities that he stole the truck from a weigh station in Rainbow, California because he was sure zombies were hot on his trail. Further, despite his high speed driving and swerving all over the road, the zombies wouldn’t shake loose eventually causing Mr. Hartline to crash the truck and injuring many. As a result of the zombie attack and subsequent crash, all four lanes of the interstate were closed for several hours while cleanup crews cleared the truck from the road and corralled the two loads of strawberries on board. According to the news report it is “unknown whether Hartline was under the influence of drugs or alcohol.”

Yes, it would be a mystery as to whether Mr. Hartline was sober or slightly influenced by an “extracurricular” substance… Man, I wonder if he was? Time will tell with a potential DUI. As for now, we know he’s getting charged with grand theft. If I were a betting man I’d estimate he will be charged with DUI with serious bodily injury as well.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

18-year-old Penelope Soto was sentenced to 30 days in jail for contempt of court after flipping Circuit Judge Jorge Rodriguez-Chomat the bird on Monday during her first appearance hearing. Oddly enough Soto was arrested and before Judge Rodriguez-Chomat for a first appearance on a possession of a controlled substance charge where he was trying to establish a lower and reasonable bond for her. When the good Judge inquired as to the value of the jewelry Soto possessed it is reported that Soto stroked her hair and laughed at Judge Rodriguez-Chomat in a snarky fashion. To this Judge Rodriguez-Chomat remarked, “it’s not a joke, you know, we’re not in a club now. We are not in a club, be serious about it.” Soto replied, “I’m serious about it, you just made me laugh. You just made me laugh, I apologize. It’s worth a lot of money.” When Judge Rodriguez-Chomat inquired further as to the actual value of the jewelry Soto replied, “like Rick Ross. It’s worth money.” Not understanding Soto’s reference, Judge Rodriguez-Chomat asked if Soto was on drugs and things seemed to turn downhill from there. Judge Rodriguez-Chomat set a $5,000 bond and said “bye, bye” to which Soto sniped “adios.” Annoyed, Judge Rodriguez-Chomat summoned her back to the podium and increased her bond to $10,000 and again sent her on her way. But the altercation would not be complete without Soto flipping Judge Rodriguez-Chomat the bird and blurting “f*ck you” on her way out the door. For this Judge Rodriguez-Chomat yet again brought her back and issued her a 30 day criminal contempt of court sentence.

First and foremost the first thing I and the Tampa criminal lawyers in my firm impress upon our clients is to be mannerly in front of the particular presiding Judge on their case. Alienate the Judge and your difficulties are compounded ten fold. In other words, don’t piss off the person that could eventually sentence you or approve of a plea deal negotiated between your Tampa criminal attorney and the State. Penelope Soto screwed up. Not only is a $5,000 bond reasonable for a third degree felony, Soto will now instantly begin serving her contempt sentence. Unlike civil contempt where a Court’s ruling is made and ignored, direct criminal contempt is governed by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.830 and offers very little due process. Criminal contempt allows for summary punishment when the contempt is performed in the presence of the Court. The Judge will then allow an opportunity for the Defendant to show cause as to why they shouldn’t be sentenced and depending on the cause, will impose sentence immediately and without a trial.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

A Jacksonville Beach, Florida mother pled guilty in Duval County Circuit Court on January 30th to four counts of Child Neglect. Dalina Nicholas, 36, is accused of repeatedly selling sex with her 6-year-old daughter to drug abusing and homeless men in exchange for drugs and money to support her own drug habit. Nicholas, originally facing a sexual battery charge has agreed to testify against those men alleged to have sexually abused her daughter in exchange for that sexual battery charge being dropped. Sexual battery under Florida Statute 794.011 as alleged against the other defendants and likely as initially alleged against Nicholas is a Capital Felony with the requirement to register as a Sexual Predator. Generally Capital felonies are punishable by death. However, in Capital cases for rape of a woman or child not involving death, execution has been ruled to be unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court through their decisions in Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977) and Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008). As you can imagine, despite the terrible allegations against her, Nicholas has dodged a certain life sentence in her agreement to cooperate with the State. In all candor I believe this is a deal any Tampa criminal lawyer would advise his client to enter into should the implicating facts be overwhelming.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

A Minnesota State Court of Appeals recently ruled that a two wheeled motorized transit machine called a “Segway” was more like a pedestrian than a “vehicle” for purposes of Minnesota’s DUI law, thereby throwing out a DUI charge against Mark Greenman, a two time contestant of the Segway DUI challenge. The Minnesota court ruled that a Segway, having a top speed of only 15 miles per hour, makes it much more like a human being and their movement than that of a car or other device considered to be a vehicle under Minnesota law. A common misconception just about anywhere you go is that one cannot get a DUI on a “device” that isn’t propelled by some type of motor, be it gas or electric. Because DUI is most often prosecuted in a State court, laws vary by state and some probably do adopt this notion. Florida may be a bit vague on this issue. Our Tampa criminal attorneys have long felt that Florida is very much a “Police State,” enacting and enforcing laws that reap a financial benefit for the State more so than those laws aim to punish. In Florida one can get a DUI on a bicycle, State v. Howard, 510 So.2d 612 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), a lawnmower, while simply sitting in your car with keys nearby, on an ATV, or any other “device” considered a vehicle. Rest assured the definition is a broad one so as to encompass as many objects into the “vehicle” umbrella as possible. So what about a Segway? Electric Personal Assistance Mobility Devices are described in Florida Statute 316.003(83) as essentially being segways. Further, this section explicitly excludes them from being a “vehicle,” an issue very relevant for purposes of DUI in Florida. From the look of it, if the segway fits the description under this Statute, you likely are excluded from a DUI charge. Where this could get sticky is if there is a tandem wheel segway produced or ridden and the thing goes over 20 miles per hour.

In Florida in order to prove that one was driving under the influence contrary to Florida Statute 316.193, it must proven that the following two elements existed beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. Someone drove or was in actual physical control of a vehicle.

2. While driving or in actual physical control of the vehicle, the individual was either;

a. under the influence of alcoholic beverages and/or a chemical substance and/or a controlled substance to the extent that his or her normal faculties were impaired.

or
b. had a blood/breath-alcohol level of .08 or more grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood/210 liters of breath.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

28 year old former Tampa Bay Rays player Elijah Dukes was arrested again Monday night on several outstanding warrants for failing to appear in court for past criminal charges. Dukes, a former major league baseball player with incredible talent but an inability to stay out of a criminal courtroom was also arrested on a driving while license suspended, cancelled, or revoked charge. Dukes is a native of Tampa and last played in the big leagues in 2009 for the Washington Nationals. This arrest is one in a long line dating from 2003 and ranging from domestic violence and obstructing a police officer to contempt of court arising from an alleged failure to pay child support.

Because Dukes is facing a new charge for driving while license suspended, cancelled, or revoked any relatively experienced Tampa criminal lawyer could safely presume that Dukes was pulled over for a routine civil traffic violation or officers ran his license plates revealing the registered owner, Dukes, had a suspended license and recognizing that the driver fit Dukes’ description. Either is a valid way for police to detain a Florida driver. Under Florida Statute 322.34(2), any person who is driving in Florida and knows that their driver’s license is cancelled, suspended, or revoked is guilty of a second degree misdemeanor on their first offense and first degree misdemeanor on their second offense. A third of subsequent conviction under 322.34(2) is a third degree felony.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

16 year old Steubenville, Ohio students and football players Ma’Lik Richmond and Trent Mays will be tried as juveniles next month for the rape of a 16 year old girl who passed out due to what is thought to be administration of a date rape drug at a house party last August. It is alleged that Richmond and Mays were part of a group of high school boys who gang raped the unwilling victim. This case has taken social media and the Internet by storm partly due to the posting of a video depicting a recent Steubenville High School graduate making jokes about the victim and the interaction of the “Rape Crew” with her as she lay unconscious. Adding to the interest of a Nation is the idea that Steubenville is a town, much like the fictional town of West Canaan, Texas in the movie Varsity Blues, where high school football rules. There is the notion that in Steubenville winning high school football games is such a priority that their own local prosecutors and Judges shouldn’t be trusted to try Richmond and Mays’ case. For these reasons the town of Steubenville is on a quest to debunk these ideas and show that these actions won’t be tolerated. In spite of all the back and forth, justice must be served and that must be done via a fair trial system.

Under Florida law I believe Richmond and Mays, because they are 16, would be charged as adults pursuant to a State Attorney’s discretionary Information under Florida Statute 985.557(1)(b). In charging a juvenile as an adult the State Attorney, upon a conviction, gives the Court jurisdiction to sentence a 16 year old juvenile to an adult sentence. As it stands this opinion runs contrary to the election in Ohio to try them as juveniles. I won’t speculate as to the reasoning behind the Ohio Prosecutor’s decision to leave these young men in the juvenile system. I, like the rest of us, only have access to what I read online and in the newspapers.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

A mother of two young boys and their grandmother are facing serious charges for making a 1 year old and a 5 year old little boy pose for pictures with marijuana. Leslie County, Kentucky deputies allege that grandmother Beth Hensley and mother Tracey Hensley took pictures of the two boys with marijuana joints and a large marijuana bud near their faces. The picture of each boy with the joint shows the joint in the boys’ mouth while someone appears to be trying to light it. Grandmother, Beth Hensley, was reported to authorities after attempting to have the pictures developed at her local Rite-Aid.

Beth Hensley is currently facing trafficking marijuana, possession of marijuana, and cultivating marijuana charges. Tracey Hensley is currently facing similar charges in addition to endangering the welfare of a minor and unlawful transaction with a minor. As to be expected, the children were removed from the home by social services and placed in the care of a relative. When questioned by police, the sagely mother-daughter duo explained that the joint was not filled with marijuana from the gigantic bud in other pictures, but rather they were going John Wayne style and smoking a large cigarette full of Prince Albert tobacco. Yes, totally believable. When ultimately questioned as to their motive for this exotic photo shoot, mother of the year Tracey Hensley responded that “it was just something to show them later on in a picture album how crazy their grandma was.” Crazy indeed.

Ladies, ladies, ladies. Not the best idea you’ve ever had. Not only are you facing ridiculously serious charges, it may be tough to get those kids back in your care. As Floridians we’re used to “weird news” so things like this should come as no surprise. In fact, our Tampa criminal lawyers represented an individual with similar facts who accidentally sent his kid to school with marijuana and scales in the kid’s backpack. If one were to reenact Miss Kentucky and Miss Kentucky runner up’s tomfoolery in Florida, they could face similar charges.
Continue reading →

Contact Information
Mayberry Law Firm
3902 Henderson Blvd, #208-136
Tampa, FL 33629
Phone: (813) 444-7435

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2025, Mayberry Law Firm
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design