Published on:

By

Lindsay Lohan appeared in a Los Angeles courtroom again yesterday to answer to charges that she violated her probation stemming from a jewelry theft in 2011 in addition to the crimes alleged to have been the basis for her probation violation. Lohan currently faces charges for reckless driving, lying to police and obstructing police stemming from her claim that she was not behind the wheel of her car when it crashed into a truck in Santa Monica, California this past June. Lohan, who seemingly has been in and out of trouble since she’s been old enough to say “trouble” was at one time doubtful for attending her mandatory court date. Lohan, who recently fired her long time Los Angeles criminal defense attorney Shawn Holley had a letter submitted by her current attorney Mark Heller indicating that she was in poor health and wasn’t able to attend her hearing. It is thought that because several tabloids published pictures of her shopping over the past weekend and appearing in good health that Lohan changed her mind and elected to attend her hearing for fear of a warrant being issued for her arrest.

All States being a little bit different in their handling of criminal matters, were Lohan’s legal issues in Florida I don’t believe there would be an issue of whether or not she is going to appear in court consistently. In Florida if one is put on probation they are always subject to violating such probation by not complying with the requirements found in Florida Statute 948.03. Generally if they violate that probation through a technical violation a “no bond” warrant will be issued or if they violate by committing new crime amounting to arrest they will go to jail with a bond on their new case but no bond on the violation of probation. Since Lohan is accused of violating her 2011 probation by a new law violation, had this happened in Florida it is doubtful Lohan would have been granted a bond considering her inability to avoid getting in trouble while on probation. As a Tampa criminal attorney I can say that in our area if one had the track record of Ms. Lohan and was in a similar situation as her, I cannot think of any of our local Tampa Bay area criminal judges who would be willing to give her a bond.
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

Prominent local attorney Charles Phillip Campbell was arrested last night and charged with DUI for the second time. Campbell is currently representing Todd “MJ” Schnitt in a trial that is underway against Todd “Bubba the Love Sponge” Clem alleging defamation of character by the Sponge against MJ and his wife. Bubba the Love Sponge is alleged to have made statements that were false, highly offensive and defamatory in nature thereby causing damage to both Kelly and his wife. Campbell is alleged to have been travelling in his four door gray Nissan when he was observed by a Tampa Police Officer to have allegedly violated the right of way of another vehicle according to an arrest report. When the Officer made contact with Campbell it is further alleged that he witnessed signs of impairment including red and glassy eyes and the distinct odor of alcohol emanating from Campbell’s breath. According to the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s website, this DUI arrest is not Mr. Campbell’s first rodeo with such an allegation, having previously been arrested on July 14, 2008 and recording a breath test of .153 and .156 respectively. It is unknown from either this report or the report from 2008 who Campbell’s Tampa criminal lawyer was or is currently.

Aside from the sensationalism this trial has already produced, this certainly adds to the appeal. Not only are arguably the two biggest morning DJs in Tampa at each others throats in a courtroom, now there is a very prominent attorney accused of driving under the influence on an evening while a trial of which he is lead counsel is in full swing. You really can’t make this stuff up! In reality, Mr. Campbell could be facing a rather stiff penalty should things not go his way on this allegation. For arguments sake and assuming Campbell pled to the DUI as charged in 2008, he is now facing his second DUI within 5 years. If Campbell ends up having to plea to the DUI charge as alleged for his arrest last night he is facing a statutory minimum mandatory 10 days in the Hillsborough County Jail. For purposes of the minimum mandatory, all that matters is that the second dui “offense” date occur within 5 years of the prior DUI conviction. State v. Daly, 15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 447 (Fla. 18th Cir. Ct. Feb. 4, 2008)11 Fla. Prac., DUI Handbook § 13:1 (2012-2013 ed.). So, for strategy’s sake, a Tampa criminal lawyer making an effort to hold Mr. Campbell’s plea to DUI (should that be the end result) until after July 14, 2013 won’t be beneficial based on applicable caselaw and the way Florida Statute 316.193(6)(b) is written. If he has in fact been convicted of a prior DUI and his Tampa DUI attorney can negotiate a reduced charge of reckless driving the minimum mandatory won’t apply and he won’t likely face a court imposed driver’s license suspension. Otherwise if he does plea to a second DUI within 5 years of a prior he is looking at the following:
Continue reading →

By
Posted in: DUI
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

By

60 year old pornographic filmmaker Ira Isaacs was sentenced on January 17, 2013 in the Central District of California for the Federal crime of producing and selling obscene videos and distributing obscene videos. Isaacs is known as a “shock porn” director and has routinely made videos depicting bestiality and sexual conduct involving feces. One such video was known as “Two Girls, One Cup” and involved a sexual encounter with two women eating human waste. Isaacs’ criminal defense attorney argued that despite the horrific nature of the videos that they are protected speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. This argument fell on deaf ears when a federal jury convicted Isaacs on April 27, 2012 of a superseding indictment involving several counts. Pursuant to his sentencing Isaacs was ordered by Federal District Court Judge George H. King to serve 48 months in the Federal Bureau of Prisons, be subject to supervised release upon his release from prison for three years and pay a $10,000 fine. Isaacs was tried previously, both ending in mistrials. In 2008 his initial trial ended in mistrial when presiding Judge Alex Kozinski was forced to recuse himself after it was found that he possessed pornographic material on a personal website. Later, during a trial on March 6, 2012 a jury deadlocked at 10-2 resulting in a second mistrial.

As best as I can tell Isaacs was indicted for violations of 18 USC 1465 for Production and Transportation of Obscene Matters for Sale and Distribution, 18 USC 1462(a) for Importation or Transportation of Obscene Matters and lastly 18 USC 2257(f)(4) for failing to keep records of actors and actresses involved in his movies. The applicable language or gist of the statutes of which Isaacs was charged is as follows:

18 USC 1465- Whoever knowingly produces with an intent to distribute into interstate or foreign commerce for the purpose of sale or distribution, any obscene material, would be guilty of 18 USC 1465 and subject to a five year term in the bureau of prisons and a fine.

18 USC 1462(a)- Whoever brings into the US or uses an express company for carriage in interstate or foreign commerce any obscene, lewd or lascivious motion-picture film shall be subject to a five year term in the bureau of prisons and a fine.

18 USC 2257(f)(4)- It is unlawful for one to produce any motion picture as described in the preceding statutes without creating an individual and identifiable record pertaining to each performer in the motion picture. In essence this law is aimed at preventing minors from engaging in such movies.
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

Cortnee Brantley, the girlfriend of Dontae Morris now awaits her fate as Middle District of Florida jurors deliberate in her Misprison of a Felony trial. Brantley was with Dontae Morris on June 29, 2010 during a tragic traffic stop where Tampa Police Department officers Jeffrey Kocab and David Curtis were murdered by Dontae Morris. After Morris is said to have shot Officer Kocab and Officer Curtis, Cortnee Brantley fled the scene via car and Dontae Morris fled the scene on foot. At issue in the trial is whether Cortnee Brantley knew whether or not her boyfriend, Dontae Morris, was a convicted felon carrying a firearm. This case has gone to trial in one previous attempt, resulting in a hung jury when the empaneled jury at the time could not come to a decision after deliberating for nearly eight hours.

Ask any Tampa criminal lawyer with any Federal criminal court experience and you’ll likely be told that a misprison of a felony charge is rarely a crime charged directly. Just as a reckless driving charge is generally a reduction from driving under the influence, misprison of a felony is something we, as Tampa Federal criminal attorneys, use in an effort to convince the United States Attorney’s Office to reduce a more serious crime to. Frankly, misprision of a felony is an odd charge as it is not one typically found at the State court level. Federal in nature, misprision of a felony is an old common law charge held over from old English courts who used this charge to prosecute those for failing to report a crime. Even in England the charge was considered a misdemeanor and carried with it an exception for those who could be incriminated by divulging the subject crime. Like old England, the 5th Amendment to the Constitution prevents Brantley from being forced to report the subject shooting. Rather, the charges against Brantley are based on the United States Attorney’s allegation that she had a duty to report that Dontae Morris was a felon in possession of a firearm, contrary to Florida Statute 790.23. Per Federal Statute 18 USC 4 one who has knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

18 year old Bradenton, Florida man Charles Ross was arrested on Sunday in Manatee County, Florida on battery allegations for allegedly giving numerous movie goers “wedgies.” Allegedly Ross owns and operates a You Tube page where he posts video of himself performing pranks on random strangers. From this report, Ross’ MO is to have a friend video him in public arenas approaching random people or their property and taking action that isn’t necessarily considered to be accepted in the public eye. In this particular situation Manatee County deputies report that Ross would walk up behind a person and grab the back of their pants and then pull them up high, causing pain or discomfort, all while videotaping the encounter. Clearly, the glaring difference between this prank and prior pranks is the visit to the Manatee County Jail.

At first blush Ross’ actions appear to be harmless pranks pulled by an immature kid seeking attention and some form of minor fame via You Tube. When considered and reviewed by a Tampa criminal attorney it appears the Manatee County authorities and Ross’ victims felt this harmless prank may have borne some harm, thereby leading to battery charges. A battery charge in Florida is codified under Florida Statute 784.03. To sustain a charge for simple battery against Ross, the Manatee County State Attorney’s Office must prove that Ross actually and intentionally touched another person against their will OR that Ross intentionally caused harm to another person. Assuming Ross has no prior record he would be looking at a first degree misdemeanor count for every person he blessed with a wedgie, each count punishable by up to 11 months, 29 days in the Manatee County Jail and a $1,000 fine payable to the great State of Florida. I believe it would be difficult to find a Tampa criminal attorney who would say with a straight face that Ross really intended to hurt anyone. With that consideration, the Manatee State Attorney’s Office would have to pursue this case under the theory that Ross intentionally touched each victim against their will. Considering the likelihood of numerous witnesses coming forward and video evidence of the alleged crimes, should the State pursue these charges it appears the case is open and shut in favor of the State.
Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Local Tampa man, Cort Allenbrand has been arrested on arson charges after authorities allege that he set his girlfriend’s house on fire in Seffner, Florida early Wednesday morning. Hillsborough County Fire and Rescue authorities claim Cort Allenbrand went to his ex-girlfriend’s home early this morning with fire accelerant and lit a fire near the back of the residence. Before the fire could engulf the house and cause major damage a nearby neighbor was able to put out the blaze with a fire extinguisher. Police say Allenbrand was able to flee the scene but was arrested a few hours later at 3:30AM and booked into the Hillsborough County Jail. As it stands now, police are recommending to the State Attorney’s Office that he be charged with the first degree felony version of arson due to the subject matter of the arson being considered a dwelling. In Florida, arson of a dwelling is a first degree felony regardless of whether it is occupied.

I don’t think it’s a stretch to say Allenbrand or whoever started this fire had an axe to grind in some way, shape, or form against his ex-girlfriend or her mother. In my experience as a Tampa criminal attorney, arson is a crime committed by a kid, is committed by someone trying to cover something up, or as I believe in this case, is committed by someone who is angry with someone else. What most arsonists don’t take into consideration is just how seriously Florida police agencies and State Attorney’s Offices take an allegation of arson.

Arson is codified under Florida Statute 806.01. Defined, arson occurs when one willfully and unlawfully, or while in the commission of any felony, by fire or explosion, damages or causes to be damaged any dwelling occupied or not, or its contents or any structure or its contents, where people are normally present. Examples of places covered under this Statute could be: jails, prisons, or detention centers; hospitals, nursing homes, or other health care facilities; department stores, office buildings, business establishments, churches, or educational institutions during normal hours of occupancy; or other similar structures; or any other structure that the individual knew or had reasonable grounds to believe was occupied by a someone. Complete this magic circle of fun and you’ll be staring down the barrel of first degree felony, first degree arson punishable by up to 30 years in the Florida Department of Corrections and a $10,000 fine.
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

Vero Beach, Florida gentleman Robert Briley was charged with Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon on December 16, 2012 after allegedly swinging a baseball bat at his best friend. It’s reported that Briley continuously requested his wife and friend over the course of the day to engage in a sexual liaison known as a threesome. Specifically, it is noted that Briley was interested in watching his wife perform oral sex on his friend and also wanted his friend to touch Mrs. Briley’s undercarriage. After being denied repeatedly by his friend, Briley continued in his quest until his friend agreed to take Briley’s wife privately into the bedroom for a little one on one. Evidently this crossed the line, albeit a blurry one, resulting with Briley swinging his bat in the general direction of his friend’s face, thereby prompting police intervention. Ultimately the police showed up, interviewed the involved parties, and chose to take Briley to jail for Aggravated Assault. When interviewed, Mrs. Briley told police that Briley and friend had been drinking all day prior to the incident. Surprise, surprise. Briley admitted to the drinking but denied using his bat.

If the facts of this odd, yet awesome scenario are to be believed, Mr. Briley is facing a pretty serious charge. Florida Statute 784.021 governs the applicable charge of Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon. Defined, an Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent all while using an item that can be classified as a deadly weapon. Depending on which “bat” this report is referring to will determine whether an Aggravated Assault charge will stick. Well maybe… Assuming Briley had a baseball bat and went after one or more of remaining ménage a trois partiers while swinging, there could most definitely be an Aggravated Assault charge levied. It seems he had an item that would satisfy the “deadly weapon” element to the charge and generally a drunken, enraged man wielding such bat would qualify him for a general assault charge. Add those together and you have the recipe for Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon.
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