When a person is charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, evidentiary disputes often determine what information a jury will hear at trial. Motions in limine, requests made before trial to admit or exclude evidence, can significantly shape the outcome of the case. A recent decision from a Florida court illustrates how federal courts apply the rules of evidence in firearm prosecutions. If you are facing federal firearm charges, it is critical to have a Sarasota criminal defense attorney who understands how evidentiary rulings can impact your case and protect your rights before trial.

Factual and Procedural Background

Allegedly, the defendant was stopped by law enforcement while driving a vehicle. During the stop, officers discovered a firearm in the car. It is reported that the defendant, who had multiple prior felony convictions, including armed robbery and burglary, was charged with possession of a firearm or ammunition by a convicted felon in violation of federal law. The case was set for trial, and before the proceedings began, the defendant filed a motion in limine seeking to exclude several categories of evidence that he argued would unfairly prejudice the jury.

It is alleged that the defendant requested the court to prohibit the government from referencing six main types of evidence: (1) a prior case connected to the vehicle’s license plate, (2) a black duffel bag and its contents, (3) a red bookbag found in the vehicle, (4) the criminal history and drug charges of a passenger, (5) an observation of a bulge in the defendant’s waistband before the stop, and (6) the defendant’s probationary status and broader criminal history. The prosecution agreed not to introduce some categories of evidence but opposed the exclusion of others that it believed were relevant to the firearm charge.

The post Florida Court Discusses Evidentiary Rulings in Criminal Cases appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Under federal law, people convicted of certain crimes lose privileges granted to most citizens. For example, people convicted of felonies constituting crimes of violence typically cannot lawfully carry or own firearms. As such, if a law enforcement agent stops a convicted felon and finds a gun in their possession, it could result in criminal charges. As discussed in a recent Florida case, the sentence for gun crime depends, in part, on the seriousness of the defendant’s prior convictions. If you are charged with a weapons crime, it is sensible to speak to a Sarasota gun crime defense lawyer to evaluate your options for protecting your interests.

Case Setting

Reportedly, in September 2019, the defendant was arrested for domestic violence battery, during which law enforcement discovered a loaded pistol in his possession. He was indicted for possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, to which he entered guilty pleas. The presentence investigation report revealed the defendant’s two previous convictions for Florida felonies that were considered crimes of violence: aggravated assault in 2014 and felony battery in 2011.

It is alleged that in the felony battery case, the defendant was initially charged with several offenses, including possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, but eventually pleaded no contest to felony battery. The report of the defendant’s arrest detailed an altercation where the defendant allegedly strangled their partner. In the aggravated assault case, the defendant briefly left an argument to retrieve a handgun from their vehicle and returned to frighten the roommate of an acquaintance. The defendant contested the classification of these convictions as crimes of violence during sentencing.

The post Florida Court Discusses Crimes of Violence for Sentencing Purposes appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Florida law regulates the possession and concealment of firearms. For example, people are permitted to carry concealed weapons, but only under certain circumstances. As such, if a person is caught by the police with a concealed gun in their possession, they may face criminal charges. As explained by a Florida court in an opinion recently issued in a gun crime case, the law permitting concealed weapons in a private vehicle does not permit people to carry such weapons on their person. If you are charged with a gun crime, it is advisable to meet with a Sarasota weapons crime defense lawyer to discuss your possible defenses.

Case Setting

It is reported that in June 2022, police officers pulled over the defendant for a traffic infraction. Upon approaching the defendant’s vehicle, the officers noticed a handgun in the car’s glove compartment. They also detected the smell of marijuana. They asked the defendant to exit the vehicle. When he complied, the officers saw that he had a crossbody bag over his shoulder and chest, which was zipped closed. Upon searching the bag, the officers found a loaded handgun, leading to the defendant’s arrest for carrying a concealed firearm.

Allegedly, the defendant was subsequently arrested for carrying a concealed firearm in violation of section 790.01(2) of the Florida Statutes. The defendant argued for dismissal, contending that under section 790.25(5), he was allowed to possess the concealed firearm as it was securely encased within a private conveyance. The trial court agreed with the defendant’s argument and dismissed the charge. The State appealed the decision.

The Right to Carry a Concealed Firearm in Florida

Upon review, the court reversed the trial court’s decision to dismiss the charge against the defendant. It was argued by the State that the trial court’s ruling was erroneous because it overlooked a crucial sentence in section 790.25(5), which expressly stated that the subsection should not be construed to authorize the carrying of a concealed firearm “on the person.”

The court agreed with the State’s argument, noting that the defendant’s interpretation, allowing possession of a firearm even if carried on the person as long as it was securely encased within a vehicle, was inconsistent with the plain language of the statute. The court also emphasized that section 790.25(5) limits the right to possess a firearm in a vehicle to those that are securely encased or not immediately accessible for use and are not carried on the person.

Therefore, the court reversed the trial court’s dismissal of the information and remanded the case for further proceedings, holding that even a securely encased weapon does not fall under the private conveyance exception if it is carried on the person.

Talk to a Skilled Criminal Defense Attorney

Under Florida law, most people are lawfully permitted to possess weapons, but if a gun owner does not comply with the terms of applicable firearm laws, they may be charged with gun crimes. If you are charged with a gun offense, it is in your best interest to talk to an attorney about your rights. The skilled Sarasota gun crime defense lawyers of Hanlon Law can advise you of your rights and help you to seek the best result possible under the facts or your case. You can reach Hanlon Law by calling 941-462-1789 or using the form online to arrange a conference.

The post Florida Court Discusses Gun Crimes Arising Out of Concealed Firearms appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Typically, when a person faces numerous charges arising out of a single incident, they will be tried for all of the offenses in one trial. In some instances, though, a defendant may be able to successfully demonstrate that certain charges should be severed, as a trial on all charges at once would be prejudicial. In a recent ruling, a Florida court discussed what evidence a defendant must offer to show severance is warranted in a case in which the defendant was found guilty of possessing a firearm as a violent career criminal. If you are charged with a weapons offense, it is advisable to speak to a Sarasota weapons crime defense attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the defendant had an altercation with the victim, who was his girlfriend, at the victim’s house. The altercation became physical, and the defendant brandished a gun and fired multiple shots into the air. He was subsequently charged with aggravated assault, burglary with battery, assault, and possession of a firearm as a violent career criminal.

Allegedly, the defendant moved to sever the gun possession charge from the other offenses, arguing that severance was necessary for a fair trial. The court denied his motion but bifurcated the hearing; during the first phase, the jury found that the defendant possessed a firearm, and during the second, it found that he qualified as a violent career criminal. The defendant was sentenced to life in prison, and he appealed.

The post Court Discusses Severance of Charges in Florida Criminal Trials appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution offers people protection from unreasonable searches and seizures. Broadly speaking, this means that law enforcement officials must have a warrant to conduct a search. Fourth Amendment protections are critical to safeguarding individual privacy and preventing government abuse of power. There are exceptions to the general rule, however, such as when an officer has reasonable suspicion that a person is committing a crime. Recently, a Florida court addressed what constitutes adequate suspicion of a crime to conduct a warrantless search in a case in which a juvenile appealed his firearms offense convictions. If you are a juvenile charged with a criminal offense, it is in your best interest to talk to a  Sarasota juvenile crime defense attorney about your rights.

The Stop and Arrest

It is reported that a police officer stopped the defendant because he was riding a bicycle at night without lights on. The defendant had a jacket over his left shoulder, and the officer believed that his nervousness and shakiness gave him the impression that there was possibly a weapon in his waistband.

Allegedly, the officer asked to conduct a pat down, and the defendant declined. The officer ultimately found a firearm in the defendant’s groin area. The defendant was charged with multiple firearm defenses. Prior to his hearing, he moved to suppress any evidence found during the stop on the grounds that the officer lacked the necessary suspicion to conduct a weapons pat down. The trial court denied the motion to suppress, and the defendant was adjudicated delinquent. He appealed.

Reasonable Suspicion to Conduct a Weapons Pat Down

In reviewing the denial of the motion to suppress, the court determined whether competent and substantial evidence supported the trial court’s factual findings and reviewed the trial court’s application of the law to the facts. Ultimately, the court found that the issuance of a citation for failing to have a bicycle light would not ordinarily validate a weapons frisk. As such, the officer must have some information indicating that the detainee poses a threat to the officer’s safety or to the safety of others.

In other words, for a weapons pat-down search to be valid, the officer must identify objective facts indicating that the person detained is armed and dangerous. The court noted that while the combination of the defendant’s nervousness and the officer’s observation of a bulge in the defendant’s clothing could justify a weapons pat-down, the arresting officer’s testimony did not support a reasonable suspicion of danger in the subject case.

Specifically, the officer did not observe a weapon or see a bulge in the defendant’s pants. Additionally, the arresting officer had no idea whether the firearm had been in the defendant’s groin area the whole time. Thus, the court concluded that the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress, as the arresting officer lacked the necessary suspicion to conduct a weapons pat down, and reversed the trial court order.

Confer with a Skilled Sarasota Criminal Defense Attorney

A juvenile conviction for a weapons offense can negatively impact a person’s life long after the sentence imposed is complete. If you are a minor charged with a gun crime or any other offense, it is wise to confer with an attorney about your potential defenses as soon as possible. The skilled Sarasota criminal defense lawyers of Hanlon Law have ample experience helping minors protect their rights in juvenile proceedings, and if you hire us, we will advocate zealously on your behalf. You can contact Hanlon Law through the online form or by calling 941-462-1789 to set up a conference.

The post Florida Court Reverses Gun Crime Conviction Following Unreasonable Search appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Laws pertaining to the medical and recreational use of marijuana continue to change in Florida and throughout the country. As such, many acts that were once criminal are now legal. A prior conviction for a marijuana-related offense can still adversely impact a defendant’s presentence investigation report, however, as demonstrated in a recent Florida ruling in which the court affirmed the defendant’s sentence for possessing a handgun as a felon. If you are charged with a weapons crime, it is important to speak to a Sarasota gun crime defense attorney about your rights.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that police officers arrested the defendant for aggravated assault with a weapon. When they searched the defendant at the time of the arrest they found a loaded gun in his pocket; it was later revealed that the gun had been stolen two years prior. The defendant had numerous prior felony convictions, including convictions for the possession of marijuana and possession of marijuana with the intent to sell.

It is alleged, therefore, that the defendant was indicted for being a felon in possession of a handgun. He entered a guilty plea without a plea agreement. The probation office drafted a presentence investigation report which used a base offense level of 20 due to the defendant’s prior felony controlled substance offense. The defendant objected, arguing that he should not have been assigned a base offense level of 20 because marijuana was not a controlled substance under the sentencing guidelines. The court overruled his objection and sentenced him to 63 months’ imprisonment. He appealed.

The post Court Explains How Prior Marijuana Crime Convictions Impact Sentencing in Florida appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Background of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with and convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He had three prior convictions under Florida law for the delivery or sale of cocaine. The court determined these offenses to be serious drug crimes under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), which mandated an increased minimum sentence of fifteen years in prison. The defendant was ultimately sentenced to 195 months in prison, after which he appealed.

Serious Drug Offenses Under the Armed Career Criminal Act

On appeal, the defendant argued that the sentencing court erred in determining that his prior three convictions for selling cocaine constituted serious drug crimes. Specifically, he argued that to determine whether a state crime is considered a serious drug offense, a court should identify the elements of the generic federal offense and then assess whether the state crime meets those elements.

The defendant went on to state that his state crimes did not require proof of mens rea as an element of the crime and, therefore, could not be considered offenses that involved the manufacturing, distribution, or possession with the intent to manufacture or distribute a controlled substance. The court rejected his argument, noting that the United States Supreme Court recently held that labeling a state crime a serious drug offense under the ACCA does not require comparison to a generic federal offense.

Rather, it only requires that the state offense involves the same behavior as defined by the elements of the federal statute. In other words, it only required that the defendant’s prior convictions arise out of the possession, distribution, or manufacturing of a drug. The appellate court found that the defendant’s prior crimes clearly qualified and affirmed the trial court’s ruling.

The defendant also argued that the sentencing court improperly determined that his prior convictions arose out of conduct that occurred on three different occasions because they were not charged in an indictment. The appellate court rejected this argument, noting the sentencing court could rely on certified records from the state court in making that assessment.

Meet with an Experienced Sarasota Attorney

If you are accused of unlawfully owning a gun, it is critical to speak to an attorney regarding how your prior convictions may affect your case. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is an experienced Sarasota gun crime defense attorney who can advise you of your rights and fight to help you seek a favorable outcome. You can contact Mr. Hanlon at 941-462-1789 or via the form online to set up a consultation.

[sc_fs_multi_faq headline-0=”h2″ question-0=”Does having a local lawyer matter? ” answer-0=”Yes. It does matter. Many people feel that a local criminal lawyer will have a deeper relationship with the local prosecutors and local judges. When you’ve spent years practicing within a particular jurisdiction, you earn a certain level of credibility with them. That credibility can play a role in the ultimate resolution of your case.” image-0=”” headline-1=”h2″ question-1=”When should you retain a criminal defense attorney?” answer-1=”The moment you become concerned that you may be the suspect in a criminal investigation, even if you haven’t been arrested, you should contact a criminal defence attorney immediately. Someone needs to be telling your side of the story to the police officer or the state attorney before you’re arrested or criminal charges are filed. Furthermore, if you are a suspect in a criminal investigation you should not be talking to anyone about the allegations, especially a law enforcement officer. Waiting can lead to an encounter with law enforcement that may lead to your arrest. Don’t wait! ” image-1=”” headline-2=”h2″ question-2=”Have I been charged with a crime if a police officer has arrested me?” answer-2=”Not necessarily. Only the state attorney (US Attorney’s Office) can formally charge you with a crime. Many people think that they’ve been charged with a crime when they are arrested by a police officer. Police officers only have powers of arrest based on probable cause. They do not have the power to formally charge someone with a crime. You will only be formally charged with a crime after the prosecutor’s office has reviewed the police officer’s criminal investigation and decided to file charges against you. That is why it is critically important to contact and retain our office the moment you suspect you are being investigated. ” image-2=”” count=”3″ html=”true” css_class=””]

The post Florida Court Discusses Sentencing for Gun Crimes appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Factual History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant pled guilty to a charge of possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. After sentencing, he appealed, and the appellate court affirmed his conviction. The defendant appealed again, and his conviction was ultimately vacated by the United States Supreme Court. the matter was then remanded back to an appellate court to determine whether the defendant’s indictment was jurisdictionally deficient and whether the district court committed a clear error in failing to advise the defendant that the prosecution was required to prove that the defendant knew he was a felon when he possessed the gun, prior to the entry of a plea.

Possession of Firearm by a Felon Charge

Due to the fact that the defendant pled guilty, he was required to demonstrate the existence of a jurisdictional defect for his sentence to be vacated. In evaluating whether a defect in a federal indictment is jurisdictional, the court must assess whether it charged the defendant with a criminal offense in violation of the laws of the United States. Although the failure to include an element may render the indictment inadequate, it does not remove jurisdiction from the federal court.

In the subject case, the court found that the language of the indictment sufficiently stated that the defendant violated a federal statute, and averred that the defendant committed a crime against the United States. As such, it was not jurisdictionally deficient. Further, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that his guilty plea was invalid constitutionally. Specifically, the court held that the district court did not commit a clear error in failing to advise the defendant that the prosecution must prove that the defendant knew he was a convicted felon at the time of the alleged offense, prior to the defendant’s entry of his plea. Thus, the defendant’s conviction was affirmed.

Meet with a Seasoned Sarasota Attorney

If you are accused of owning or possessing a weapon in violation of Florida law, it is advisable to contact an attorney regarding your rights. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a seasoned gun crime defense attorney who is adept at seeking favorable outcomes in criminal matters, and he will advocate aggressively on your behalf, to help you pursue just results. You can contact Mr. Hanlon at 941-462-1789 or through the form online to schedule a meeting.

[sc_fs_multi_faq headline-0=”h2″ question-0=”If I committed the crime does that mean I must enter a plea of guilty?” answer-0=”Absolutely not! The American system of justice requires proof before anyone can be found guilty under the law. How much proof? Proof beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. In other words, when you sit down with a criminal defense attorney and explain your situation he should be weighing in his mind how your case will play in front of a jury. I can assure you the prosecutor is doing the same thing. In fact, all trial lawyers (both criminal and civil) measure the strength and weakness of their case based on how they think it will play before a jury. As a consequence, whether you actually committed the crime is of no consequence. The question you want answered is whether the prosecutor can PROVE you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. How do you determine that? By consulting with an experienced lawyer specialized in the area of criminal law. ” image-0=”” headline-1=”h2″ question-1=”Can I feel comfortable telling a criminal defense attorney everything I did when I come in for an initial consultation? ” answer-1=” Yes you can. Everything you tell a criminal defense attorney made for the purpose of obtaining legal services or for the purpose of furthering the attorney’s representation falls within the attorney/client privilege. The attorney/client privilege exists even during an initial consultation where the client chooses not to retain the lawyer. The communications between a lawyer and his client are privileged to permit the lawyer to prepare for litigation and render effective legal advice. This is why it is so important for the client to realize that total disclosure is critical to effective legal representation. Full disclosure prevents your criminal defense attorney from guiding you in the wrong direction. You should also be aware that a lawyer’s obligation to maintain your confidences is even broader than the attorney-client privilege. Every lawyer must act in the best interest of his/her client. Only under a very narrow set of circumstances can that responsibility be abandoned. ” image-1=”” headline-2=”h2″ question-2=”Is there more than one way to get my case dismissed?” answer-2=”Yes. There are several ways your case can end up getting dismissed. First, of course, is the level of proof the prosecution may have against you. The prosecution may not have enough evidence to prove your guilt. When you sit down for a consultation with your lawyer he/she should be able to give a very good idea how powerful the prosecutor’s case might be. Second, there could be police misconduct involved in your case that could lead to a pretrial motion that could severely damage the prosecutor’s case or lead to a reduction of the charge. The police violate the defendant’s rights every day. They might violate your right to privacy by conducting an unlawful search or seizure. The police could violate your right to remain silent or right to counsel by taking your statement without proper notice of your Fifth Amendment rights. It is important to understand that a violation of your Fifth Amendment rights will only lead to a dismissal of your case when proving the criminal charge against you hinges on the admission of that statement into evidence. Some criminal charges can be proven without the use of your statement to police. While these two methods can bring about a dismissal of your criminal charge there are other approaches to bring about the same result. In order to find out whether your case involves facts that could lead to a dismissal you should contact the office of an experienced criminal defense attorney.” image-2=”” count=”3″ html=”true” css_class=””]

The post Florida Court Discusses a Possession of a Firearm Charge by a Convicted Felon appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.