Avvo Rating badge
NACDL badge
Expertise badge
Avvo Rating badge
Expertise Best Criminal Attorneys in St. Petersburg
The National Trial Lawyers Top 100
Published on:

By

Federal courts treat fraud offenses with heightened scrutiny, especially when they involve extensive identity theft, exploitation of government programs, and multi-jurisdictional activity. Individuals convicted of such offenses often pursue sentence reductions under newly enacted sentencing amendments or seek compassionate release based on post-conviction conduct or personal circumstances. However, these requests are subject to strict legal standards. A recent ruling from a Florida court highlights just how difficult it can be to obtain relief when a sentence stems from a complex and deliberate fraud scheme. If you are facing fraud charges, it is smart to meet with a St. Petersburg fraud crime defense attorney who understands what strategies can help you seek a favorable outcome.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the defendant was convicted of wire fraud and aggravated identity theft after a multi-state fraud scheme involving COVID-19 relief funds and stolen identities. Between July and September 2020, the defendant engaged in a series of fraudulent acts, including applying for Economic Injury Disaster Loans using false information and filing for unemployment insurance under stolen identities. These actions led to the theft of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It is alleged that the defendant falsely claimed to operate a bakery with twelve employees, generating almost $200,000 in annual revenues, and secured nearly $50,000 in EIDL loan proceeds. The defendant received multiple prepaid debit cards connected to fraudulent California unemployment claims and had already withdrawn more than $178,000 in cash prior to mailing the cards to Florida. The investigation uncovered that the defendant filed for benefits using information from approximately 20 identity theft victims. Continue reading →

By
Posted in: Fraud
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

By

Federal law enforcement agencies often conduct searches based on complex, ongoing criminal investigations. When those investigations involve serious allegations like stalking, attempted murder, or drug and firearm offenses, the legal justifications for search warrants are often contested in court. A recent Florida decision demonstrates how federal courts evaluate motions to suppress evidence, particularly when the probable cause supporting a warrant is challenged. If you are charged with a federal offense, it is important to understand what evidence the prosecution may use against you, and you should talk to a St. Petersburg criminal defense attorney as soon as possible.

Case Setting

It is reported that federal law enforcement began investigating a series of incidents between 2019 and 2023, allegedly targeting two victims. The incidents included attempted poisoning, two vehicle arsons, a hit-and-run, and the mailing of a threatening letter. It is alleged that these acts were part of an orchestrated effort by one victim’s estranged spouse to harass and intimidate her. In connection with the investigation, four individuals were charged for their alleged participation in this long-running plot.

It is alleged that on June 23, 2024, one of the victims was confronted in her driveway by an unidentified man who pointed a silver pistol at someone emerging from her home before fleeing in a black SUV. Surveillance footage allegedly captured a white Tesla—registered to the defendant, driving in proximity to the SUV both before and after the incident. It is reported that the investigation linked the defendant to the white Tesla, which had also been observed parked next to another vehicle registered to him at his residence. Based on these observations and other circumstantial evidence, federal agents obtained a search warrant for the defendant’s home and person on June 24, 2024. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The federal government staunchly prosecutes fraud crimes. However, they must do so within the statute of limitations, which is a crucial safeguard against indefinite legal jeopardy. The statute of limitations may be tolled in some cases, though, as discussed in a recent Florida federal court fraud case. If you are facing federal fraud charges, it is in your best interest to speak to an experienced St. Petersburg fraud crime defense attorney about what you can do to protect your rights.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant conspired to commit access device fraud and engaged in aggravated identity theft by using stolen Social Security numbers to apply for government benefits. Reportedly, these fraudulent activities occurred between 2014 and 2015. Under federal law, the statute of limitations for such offenses is generally five years, meaning the government needed to bring charges by June 2020.

It is reported that during the COVID-19 pandemic, grand jury sessions in Florida were suspended in early 2020, preventing prosecutors from obtaining a timely indictment. Instead, the government allegedly filed an information against the defendant in May 2020, just before the statute of limitations expired. However, the defendant had not waived the right to an indictment, which is required for prosecution based on an information alone.

Continue reading →

By
Posted in: Fraud
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

By

In criminal trials, it is essential for judgments to align with the jury’s findings, ensuring defendants are sentenced according to the actual charges proven in court. If they do not, it may result in an unjust outcome and may be grounds for pursuing an appeal. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida ruling that illustrated how procedural missteps in the judicial process can result in severe sentencing errors. If you are facing criminal charges, working with an experienced St. Petersburg criminal defense attorney is critical to ensuring your rights are protected throughout the legal process.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant was charged with lewd molestation after reportedly touching the victim in a lewd or lascivious manner during a swimming pool incident at his home. The prosecution alleged the victim was under the age of 12 at the time, elevating the charge to a first-degree felony punishable by life imprisonment under section 800.04(5)(b) of Florida Statutes.

It is reported that during the trial, the victim consistently testified to being 12 years old at the time of the incident, making the appropriate charge of lewd or lascivious molestation on a victim aged 12 or older but less than 16. This charge constitutes a second-degree felony with a maximum sentence of 15 years under section 800.04(5)(c). The jury was instructed on and ultimately convicted the defendant of this lesser offense.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

When defendants are sentenced to imprisonment, they may, in certain situations, request compassionate release based on extraordinary and compelling circumstances. Courts evaluate such motions against rigorous legal standards, ensuring that claims are substantiated and consistent with sentencing goals. A recent Florida drug case in which the defendant sought compassionate release based on alleged medical conditions highlights the courts’ careful scrutiny in balancing the interests of justice with compassion. If you are accused of a drug offense, it is in your best interest to speak to a trusted St. Petersburg drug crime defense attorney about your options.

Factual Setting and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the defendant was convicted of attempting to possess with intent to distribute over 500 grams of cocaine. His conviction followed a reverse sting operation orchestrated by law enforcement. The defendant had a history of drug-related and other criminal offenses, which informed the court’s sentencing decision of 20 years of imprisonment and five years of supervised release. During the arrest, it is reported that the defendant was armed, used a forged identity document, and deviated from the agreed-upon transaction terms, further heightening law enforcement’s concerns.

Allegedly, the defendant filed multiple appeals and motions following his conviction, challenging various aspects of his case, including sentencing and procedural rulings. Each of these was denied. Most recently, he moved for compassionate release, citing severe medical conditions, family circumstances, and claims of post-sentencing rehabilitation.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Florida law provides mechanisms for correcting illegal sentences; however, such challenges must adhere to strict procedural and substantive requirements. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida ruling in which the court addressed a defendant’s attempt to use a procedural motion to contest the validity of his underlying conviction for burglary, reaffirming that such efforts are impermissible. If you face burglary charges, it is critical to consult a St. Petersburgh theft crime defense attorney to understand your legal options.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the defendant was convicted of burglary with assault or battery, a first-degree felony punishable by life imprisonment, in 1990. Following his conviction, the court sentenced him to life in prison. Decades later, in 2022, the defendant filed a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), arguing that his life sentence was illegal because of an alleged jury instruction error during his trial.
 
Specifically, the defendant asserted that the jury had been erroneously instructed only on the lesser offense of burglary of an occupied structure—a second-degree felony punishable by a maximum of 15 years imprisonment—rather than burglary with assault or battery. He contended that this instructional error rendered his conviction for the greater offense invalid and, by extension, his life sentence illegal. The trial court denied the motion, finding it procedurally improper, and the defendant appealed.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

People convicted of sex crimes will often be sentenced to supervised release after their incarceration. Typically, the court will impose standard conditions as terms of the release. In certain instances, they may impose additional parameters, such as financial restrictions, to prevent the defendant from engaging in further criminal activity. As illustrated in a recent Florida sex crime case, as long as such terms are reasonably related to the sentencing factors, they will likely be upheld. If you are charged with a sex crime, it’s essential to understand your rights, and it’s wise to reach out to a St. Petersburg sex crime defense lawyer to evaluate your case.

Factual Setting and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the defendant was convicted of a child pornography offense involving electronic devices. His criminal history also included prior offenses related to child pornography and various sex crimes. In light of his criminal past and the nature of his offenses, the district court imposed a special condition of supervised release that prohibited him from incurring new credit charges, opening additional lines of credit, or making major purchases without prior approval from his probation officer.

It is reported the court imposed these financial restrictions to support the defendant’s compliance with other conditions of his supervised release, particularly the prohibition on using electronic devices. The defendant challenged this condition, arguing that it was not reasonably related to the sentencing factors outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and involved a greater deprivation of liberty than was necessary. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Sex crime convictions can devastate people’s lives. In order to convict a person of a sex crime, though, the State must produce evidence sufficient to establish each element of the charged offense. Notably, they must do so based on the statute at the time the alleged crime was committed, not when the trial is conducted, as discussed in a recent Florida sex crime case. If you are accused of a sex offense, it’s important to understand your rights, and it’s advisable to contact a St. Petersburg sex crime defense lawyer.

Factual Background and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the State charged the defendant with sexual battery on a victim under 12 years of age. Testimony at trial revealed that the victim, who was nine and ten years old at the time, visited her sister’s apartment where the defendant lived. During these visits, the defendant inappropriately touched the victim multiple times. Initially, the victim could not remember if the defendant’s fingers went inside her, but after her memory was refreshed with her deposition, she confirmed that they did.

Reportedly, before closing arguments, the trial court and parties discussed the jury instructions. The State requested that the jury be instructed under the 2022 version of the sexual battery statute, which had expanded the definition of sexual battery to include penetration of the female genitals, not just the vaginal canal. The defendant objected to the use of these definitions, but the court overruled the objection. The jury convicted the defendant of both sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation, and he was sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Parents involved in custody disputes will often disagree with how the courts divide parental rights and parenting time. Regardless of whether a parent agrees with a court’s decision in a custody case, however, they must abide by it. If they do not, and take or retain a child without permission, they may be accused of kidnapping or interfering with child custody. If they are subsequently found guilty of such crimes, their penalties must align with Florida law, and if they do not, they may be vacated, as demonstrated in a recent Florida case. If you are charged with kidnapping, it is smart to meet with a  St. Petersburg kidnapping defense lawyer to assess your options.

Case Setting

It is reported that the defendant was convicted of kidnapping and interference with child custody. She challenged her convictions on the basis that she was entitled to a twelve-person jury under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The trial court denied this claim, leading to the defendant’s appeal.

Allegedly, the defendant also contested three aspects of her sentencing: the trial court’s consideration of injuries sustained by an aggravated battery victim, even though she was acquitted of aggravated battery and simple battery charges; the classification of kidnapping as a capital felony, which precluded her eligibility for a downward departure in sentencing; and the imposition of a $746 prosecution cost without proper evidence or factual findings to justify exceeding the $100 statutory minimum. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

People convicted of violent offenses will typically be sentenced to years in prison. Not all convictions are based on adequate evidence, though, and in many cases, there are grounds for challenging a jury’s verdict. People who wish to seek appellate or habeas relief must comply with the proper procedure, though, otherwise their challenges may be denied on procedural grounds. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida ruling in which the court granted the state’s motion to dismiss a habeas corpus petition, in part due to the defendant’s procedural defects. If you are accused of committing a violent crime,  it is prudent to talk to a St. Petersburg violent crime defense lawyer about your case.

Facts of the Case and Procedural History

It is alleged that the defendant was indicted for first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder. The jury found the defendant guilty of the lesser offenses of manslaughter and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, resulting in sentences of eleven years and five years in prison, respectively. The defendant appealed the convictions, but the state appellate court affirmed the decision. The defendant did not seek post-conviction relief in state court.

Reportedly, the defendant filed a federal habeas corpus petition raising several claims: that the trial court violated his federal rights by denying motions to dismiss under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law, for judgment of acquittal due to insufficient evidence, and because the indictment did not allege all crime elements. Additionally, the defendant claimed ineffective assistance of counsel for not moving to sever the charges and for failing to raise issues on appeal. Continue reading →