by

As first reported on the Baynews Nine website, it may soon be against the law to sell synthetic marijuana (also known as K2 or “spice”) in the St. Petersburg city limits. The Mayor, Bill Foster, wants to move forward on his plan to ban the sales of this so-called drug.

Claiming that it is “frying people’s minds” the Mayor also wants the possession of synthetic marijuana to result in a civil infraction or even an arrest. As of this writing, the city council’s Public Safety committee has given the Mayor permission to have his city attorneys write up that law.

As previously written about in the Tampa Bay Times, St. Petersburg and in particular Williams Park downtown has seen a large uptick in violence and drug abuse. Williams Park and the surrounding area has been overridden by the homeless population, many of whom smoke spice and panhandle or commit crimes (such as prostitution or robberies) for money. Much of that crime is being blamed on this new drug.

Synthetic marijuana is made of a legal plant, which is dried and ground up. It is then mixed with various chemicals that can produce mind-altering effects. The problem is the chemicals/plants are not regulated and while individually these chemicals are not safe, when they are mixed together, the results can be even more dangerous and unpredictable.

Depending on a person’s body chemistry and the spice itself, the drug has been blamed for violent behaviors, hallucinations, vomiting and rapid heart beat. This is ironic as the drug claims to produce a mellow high, much like marijuana.

Saint Petersburg is merely following in the footsteps of a state law, passed in 2012 that actually bans some of the chemicals found in spice. That law has proved mostly ineffective as the manufacturers merely change up some of the chemicals. This keeps them from breaking the law but may result in unknown chemicals in unknown amounts being ingested by the smokers.Another issue the police are running into involves testing for the drug itself. Most illegal narcotics (such as cocaine or marijuana) can be tested for with results coming in a few minutes. Spice presents a problem as the lab results for the drug sometimes takes several months before it is ready. Worse, as the drug mixture keeps changing, many times the police don’t even know what to test for!

Meanwhile these city attorneys are studying similar bans recently enacted in Pasco and Hillsborough county for further guidance.

Legal Analysis

In Florida, marijuana, like many illegal drugs, falls under Florida statute 893.13. Spice or K2 will most likely not be enforceable under that statute. That is because as mentioned above, the chemicals in spice are being changed often, making the detection of this synthetic marijuana difficult. Any prosecution for spice under 893.13 would likely be overturned as vague. Unlike marijuana or other drugs under that statute, K2 is not readily defined.

It is more likely that a civil infraction/arrest for possession of this drug would not be overturned. If the St. Petersburg city lawyers craft a carefully guided proposal banning the sale of spice this too should pass constitutional muster.
Continue reading

by

From the Tampa Bay Times, a local man was sentenced to nine years in prison for his role in an aggravated fleeing and eluding case.

The 22-year-old man pled guilty to multiple charges including grand theft of a motor cehicle, DUI with property damage, fleeing and eluding and child abuse in front of Pinellas circuit court Judge Keith Myers. In addition, the defendant’s driver’s license was also revoked for life.

The chase, which lasted 14 minutes, occurred all through St. Petersburg back on July 9, 2012. The defendant was spotted by members of the Gulfport police department in a stolen SUV and began to chase him to 38th avenue North before looping back south.

The chase ended when the suspect hit a PSTA bus and then crashed into a house. The defendant’s two-year-old son was in the backseat and another passenger was severely injured. This particular case was credited for the reason that the Gulfport police department revamped their chase policies.

Among his many charges, the defendant was charged with child neglect/child abuse even though the child was not beaten or harmed. In Florida (and in Pinellas in particular), a parent driving under the influence of alcohol can be charged with child abuse or neglect as the theory is this puts the child in harm. Every county handles these cases differently. Some state attorney offices will not press forward, while other counties will punish the defendant’s severely for that particular charge.
Continue reading

by

We have previously written about Violation of Injunction orders (see here) and the different types of injunctions available. In this blog, we are going to continue the discussion on how to actually file for an injunction…

Information on filing an injunction in Pinellas County is not difficult to find. To began, you must first file a petition. This is usually free to do. The Petitioner can file this in the county that he/she resides, where the incident took place or where the Respondent lives. A Petition that is filled out must contain the Respondent’s first and last name, your name (though you CAN write “confidential” for your address if you want to keep that a secret) and a brief summary of the violence/stalking you allege occurred. One may also provide other papers/evidence such as police reports, photographs and/or other judicial orders that help your case. This is called supporting documentation. Finally, one must include the Respondent’s address and/or as much information about him/her as you can. You can complete a Sheriff’s Information Sheet. Once that is completed, a Sheriff’s deputy will “serve” both a copy of the Petition and the Judge’s order to the Respondent.

After you have filed a Petition, a Judge will then review it. The Judge will make one of three decisions. The Judge can: (1) agree that you need protection and immediately grant the Temporary Injunction Order, (2) rule that your Petition does NOT meet the Florida requirements for an Injunction but will allow a hearing to determine a final ruling or (3) will rule that your Petiton does not meet the Injunction requirements and will NOT grant you a hearing. Option number three rarely happens and at the hearing for option number two, the assigned Judge will determine if an Injunction is warranted based on testimony from you, the Respondent and any eye-witnesses to the alleged actions that may be available. It is at this hearing that you will want a Violation of Injunction lawyer to give you the best chance of success.Violation of an Injunction

After an order for an injunction has been ordered what happens if the Respondent continues to contact/harass the Petitioner? This may be the criminal charge of a Violation of Injunction. If the harassment continues, the police are usually called to make a report. Even if the police don’t feel that there are grounds to make an arrest, the Petitioner may still go to the Clerk’s office and fill out an Affidavit in Support of a Violation of Injunction if one wishes to pursue this. This can then be shared with the Judge or the state attorney’s office.

From the Pinellas County website, some reasons for a Violation of Injunction from a Respondent may include such things as:

1. Committing violence (such as a domestic battery) against the Petitoner.
2. Committing a criminal mischief against the Petitoner or destroying his/her property.
3. Being within 100 feet of the Petitioner’s motor vehicle, even if he/she is not in it.
4. Coming within 500 feet of the Petitioner’s home, work, school, or a named specific place frequently occupied by the Petitioner and/or their family.
5. Possessing a firearm or weapon if the Court had ordered them surrendered.
6. Telephoning, contacting or harassing the Petitioner personally or through a third-party.
7. Refusing to vacate a home/dwelling that the Respondent shares with the Petitioner.

In conclusion, both applying for or defending oneself against an injunction can be a complicated process. With an experienced Pinellas violence injunction lawyer by your side, you will be better prepared to deal with both the Court and with getting your life back on track.
Continue reading

by

From the channel 10 news team website, a Tampa man is facing felony charges for a joyride in a “borrowed” Walmart electric motor cart…

Timothy Carr, 48, had a few drinks and decided that he wanted to spice up his night. His night ended in jail where he was arrested for disorderly intoxication, felony retail theft and DUI for taking a motorized shopping cart for a spin…

Police were called out to a Tampa Walmart last Sunday in reference to an intoxicated man. When the officers arrived, they found the suspect in a shopping cart driving through the aisles and knocking over merchandise. He was seen drinking alcohol from a bottle he swiped from the store.

Legal Analysis

The man was arrested for retail theft after he admitted he had no money for the alcohol he had stolen. While the amount taken was not enough to be charged with a felony grand theft he was still charged with a felony because he had multiple petit theft priors.

Florida statute 812.014(3)(c) deals with a case like Timothy Carrs. While he stole a misdemeanor amount of goods, he was still charged with a third degree felony. This is because under the above statute, he can be charged with a felony theft if he had two or more prior retail theft convictions.DUI on a scooter?!

As a Saint Petersburg DUI attorney, clients are often amazed about what the law considers a vehicle. A Driving Under the Influence charge can come about from a motor vehicle, lawn mower, truck, scooter, golf cart and even a bicycle! Florida State Statute 320-01 goes into the definition of a “motor Vehicle” as follows:

320.01 Definitions, general.–As used in the Florida Statutes, except as otherwise provided, the term:
(1) ”Motor vehicle” means:
(a) An automobile, motorcycle, truck, trailer, semitrailer, truck tractor and semitrailer combination, or any other vehicle operated on the roads of this state, used to transport persons or property, and propelled by power other than muscular power, but the term does not include traction engines, road rollers, special mobile equipment as defined in s. 316.003(48), vehicles that run only upon a track, bicycles, swamp buggies, or mopeds.
(b) A recreational vehicle-type unit primarily designed as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, or travel use, which either has its own motive power or is mounted on or drawn by another vehicle. Recreational vehicle-type units, when traveling on the public roadways of this state, must comply with the length and width provisions of s. 316.515, as that section may hereafter be amended.

At first glance this statute appears to not allow for bicycle or electric motor scooter DUIs. However, a closer look at the Florida Driving Under the Influence statute reveals that you merely need to be in actual physical control of a VEHICLE on a public road and not a MOTOR vehicle. Hence the Defendant in the above article could be charged with the scooter DUI as long as he was on a public road for at least part of his joyride. Our prediction? The drinking and driving charge won’t stick as there is scant evidence that the suspect was ever on a public road as well as the fact that jury members in most Florida counties often do not like to convict their fellow citizens for non automobile drinking and driving cases!
Continue reading

by

Getting an injunction against repeat or domestic violence is one way that men or women can protect themselves against physical or emotional harm from known suspects. But what is an injunction and how can it protect you? What is a violation of injunction and how can you avoid being charged with this serious crime?

A recent blurb on the smoking gun legal website had to do with a domestic violence allegation. An Ohio woman was at a courthouse seeking a restraining order against her ex-boyfriend. When the judge left the room for a moment, the surveillance camera captures the man brutally attacking the woman, chasing her around the room and even battering his own mother when she tried to intervene! The man was eventually tased by deputies and charged with numerous offenses. Needless to say, the woman’s injunction against violence was granted.

What about injunctions in Florida? What needs to be shown in order for a judge to grant an injunction order? In this state an injunction for protection (or a “restraining order”), is a Civil Court Order that places restrictions on a person (known as a “Respondent”). This Order is placed because the Respondent is accused of violent actions (or sometimes threats) against the victim (known here as the “Petitioner”). This injunction starts when a Petition is filed with the Court by the Petitioner and a hearing is held. An injunction may have different orders that a Respondent must follow or he/she can be charged with a violation of an injunction. This restraining order may include provisions that the Respondent must move out of his/her house, that he must keep a certain distance from the Petitioner and/or no physical contact between the two parties.

The Four Types of Injunctions in Florida

1. Injunction Against Domestic Violence:

Defined under Florida Statute 741.28, “Violence or stalking that has occurred, or that the Petitioner has reasonable cause to believe they are in imminent danger of becoming the victim of, between individuals who are spouses, former spouses, or persons related by blood or marriage who are residing or have resided together as a family, or individuals who are residing together or have resided together as if family, or individuals who have a child in common”. For example, this type of Injunction can be between a man and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend (if they are or were living together), brother and sister or baby mama and baby daddy. Generally, the Petitioner only needs to show one instance of violence to get the restraining order granted.

2. Dating Violence:

This is generally stalking or violence that occured or that the Petitoner has reasonable belief that there is imminent danger of occurring between people who have (1) who have dated within the last six months, (2) are sexually involved and/or (3) have a continuous relationship that is more then just a business or social frienship.

3. Injunction Against Sexual Violence:

This type of restraining order is often the strictest and hardest to get granted. To qualify for this type, the Petitoner must show at least one of the following: He or she must have reported the incident to the police and cooperate fully with them or the Respondent was sentenced to incarceration and he/she is due out of prison within 90 days. Not just any crime is allowed to count however. The Respondent must have been incarcerated as a result of a sexual battery or a felony where a sex act was committed or attempted. If this strict criteria is not met in full, then the sexual violence injunction will not be granted by a Judge (though the Petitioner may qualify for one of the other injunction types).

4. Injunction against Repeat Violence:

Defined under Florida Statute 784.046, unlike the domestic violence injunction, there must be two (2) or more seperate acts of violence and/or stalking with at least one incident within the past six months. This may be the most common type of restraining order and is used for relationships of a non-domestic or non-romantic nature. Neighbor to neighbor, or classmate to classmate would be an example of this type of Injunction.Conclusion

In part two of this entry, we will discuss further on how to file for restraining order and also what to do if you are charged with a violation of injunction. In the meanwhile, if you or a loved one needs further information about injunctions in Pinellas county please review the pinellas clerk website, which gives more details and forms that can be filled out immediately.
Continue reading

by

From a local CBS news Miami affiliate, a naked Floridian was arrested for burglary after he broke into a local home, defecated in the house and proceeded to go on a rampage…

Greg Bruni, 21 and naked was arrested near Fort Myers, Florida after local homeowners called the police. It appears that while the owners were at home, they heard a noise coming from their roof. When they went outside to investigate, they received the shock of their lives!

The suspect jumped naked from the roof into the man, knocking him into the ground. Mr. Bruni then rushed inside the house uninvited into the house and proceeded to commit a criminal mischief by tearing a television off the wall.

The knocked down victim yelled at his wife to grab their gun. The suspect ignored three shots being fired at him (all misses) and continued to rampage inside the house. The suspect then allegedly began to masturbate on the living room floor and continued his crime spree by repeatedly defecating throughout the house. Even more disturbingly, the Defendant ran into a child’s room, and committed battery on the child by rubbing his body on the minor’s clothing while it was being worn.

Police were, of course, called out where they found the suspect falling on the ground and speaking gibberish. They had to tase him multiple times to subdue him in order to make an arrest. He was taken to a nearby hospital where a full series of tests were done in order to determine if he was suffering from a mental defect and/or an illegal drug reaction.
<

The Legal Aftermath?

What are the possible legal ramifications for the defendant? What are some realistic defenses? As a pinellas criminal defense lawyer, believe it or not, we have dealt with similar situations in the past through our practice!

The most serious charge this man is facing is a potential first degree felony, punishable by life! That charge is a burglary of an occupied dwelling, Florida statute 810.02(3). The statute reads in part as follows:

(b) For offenses committed after July 1, 2001, “burglary” means:
1. Entering a dwelling, a structure, or a conveyance with the intent to commit an offense therein, unless the premises are at the time open to the public or the defendant is licensed or invited to enter; or 2. Notwithstanding a licensed or invited entry, remaining in a dwelling, structure, or conveyance:
a. Surreptitiously, with the intent to commit an offense therein;
b. After permission to remain therein has been withdrawn, with the intent to commit an offense therein; or c. To commit or attempt to commit a forcible felony, as defined in s. 776.08.
(2) Burglary is a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, if, in the course of committing the offense, the offender:
(a) Makes an assault or battery upon any person; or (b) Is or becomes armed within the dwelling, structure, or conveyance, with explosives or a dangerous weapon

In this case, the man clearly entered into an occupied residence and committed multiple crimes (battery, criminal mischief, assault, etc). Even if the suspect was only charged with this one count, under the Florida criminal justice system, he would be scoring mandatory prison up to life, even if he has no prior crimes!

What are some possible defenses? While there are plenty, the most obvious one seems to be competence or mental problems that the Defendant may have that would leave him unable to understand the crime or understand what occurred.

In Pinellas county, when a suspect is considered possibly incompetent, the Court will order a mental evaluation (usually done by the experienced Dr. Jill Poorman). There is a series of tests and questions the suspect must answer. The purpose of these tests are to determine if the suspect is competent to stand trial. The next blog will go more into Florida statute 916.12 and what the state of Florida’s competentence standards.
Continue reading

by

An old article from the Tampa Bay Times which discussed how Pinellas county practices heightened BUI enforcement on major holidays. With spring and summer fast approaching and boating season coming soon, now is the time to learn more about “drunken boating” throughout this county.

BUI, or Boating Under the Influence, is a serious problem, especially here in Florida, which has more registered boats than any other state in the union. It is common knowledge that driving a car with an open container of alcohol is illegal. However, on a boat it is not illegal to have open cans of alcohol. In fact, if you are driving the boat, you are allowed to be drinking alcohol…yet you are NOT allowed to be “drunk” or over the legal limit of a .08 BAC.

Captain Tom Shipp of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission concurs,
“A lot of people don’t think twice about it, but whether you are in a boat or a car, the impairment is still the same.”

To combat the dangers of drinking and boating in Pinellas county, local law enforcement increases their man power on major boating holidays such as labor day, memorial day and the big one, July 4th. “We see an increase nationally during the summer months and statistically, alcohol-related arrests and accidents peak on the Fourth of July.” said John Fetterman, who works for the National Association of Boating Law Administrators.

Why the crackdown? Law enforcement studies have determined that illegal drugs or alcohol was a factor in over 25% of fatal boating accidents. In addition, drinking in or on the water affects your body differently then drinking on dry land. The experts in the article gave a multitude of examples, which include:

– Alcohol may cause an inner ear disturbance, making it more difficult to determine which way is up. This is a problem for people suddenly thrown overboard.

– Studies have shown that being impaired while boating may be more dangerous then drinking and driving a car. This is because most people are not as experienced boating as driving and may get confused.

– Motor vibrations from the boat engine and wave action are already distracting. Adding alcohol to the mix intensifies these distractions.

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR PINELLAS BUIWhile BUIs and driving while impaired have a lot in common, there are a few differences that may affect a possible legal defense. One difference deals with officer contact.

For an officer to pull you over on suspicion of drunk driving while in a car, he needs “probable cause”. He needs to observe you breaking a traffic law (such as speeding) or driving in a way where the officer suspects you may be sick, injured or impaired. On the water, however, law enforcement can board you anytime to make a safety check of your vessel! This means that even if the captain is driving the boat perfectly, he must stop and allow himself to be boarded anytime per law enforcement request. Obviously this means that the only guarantee against picking up a Pinellas BUI charge is not drinking to the point of impairment.

Another big difference between driving drunk and boating has to do with the “field sobriety tests”. The Coast Guard has developed a series of tests that are different from the standard DUI ones such as the “walk and turn” or “one leg test”. According to the Coast Guard, these new impairment tests can all be performed when seated and apply a “percentage of probability” as to if the boater is impaired or not.

Finally, another main difference is in the punishments. Both DUI and BUI have similar fines, probation periods, community service and threat of jail time (up to six months in the pinellas county jail for a first offense under .15 BAC). Punishment for driving a car under the influence will include a DUI school driving course. For those convicted of “Boating under the Influence” you will be required to take the Coast Guard Boater Safety course as well as pay an extra fine of $151 (in addition to regular court costs) to the Brain and Spinal cord fund.

In conclusion, when it comes to Pinellas BUIs, knowledge is power. Knowing that you can be boarded anytime, be aware of how much you are drinking. If you have had a few drinks and are not sure if you can pass the field sobriety tests then have a sober friend drive call a tow!
Continue reading

by

An interesting story from the New York Times, an up-and-coming trooper is accused of falsifying DUI cases to make a better name for herself…

A corporal in the Utah Highway Patrol, Lisa Steed was considered a budding star. Tough, yet kind, she racked up an impressive number of Driving under the influence” arrests and was named “Trooper of the year” in 2007. Her future seemed bright with numerous promotions heading her way.

This all changed late last fall when the trooper was fired with no warning. Her office would not give a reason why but a pending lawsuit gives a few clues. This lawsuit is claiming that she pulled over dozens of people, making numerous Drunk-driving arrests throughout her 10 year career.

The problem? According to the lawsuit, many of the drivers the trooper had pulled over were not drinking or taking controlled substances. or at least not the amounts needed to be considered impaired! This is according to the lawsuit, brought on behalf of the Plaintiffs by their former criminal defense lawyers.

According to one of the criminal law attorneys, some of the clients did not even drink alcohol. Despite passing field sobriety exercises, the trooper would claim they were impaired and still arrest them.

“We were all separately getting calls about Lisa Steed from people saying: ‘I was pulled over. I wasn’t doing anything wrong. She told me I smelled like alcohol, but I hadn’t been drinking,’ ” the lawyer said.

According to the lawsuit, over 40 people are claiming that they were faslely arrested by the Highway patrolman. This was done to impress her superiors and further her career.

According to the lawsuit, in all the cases, the charges were dropped or reduced to careless driving, but not before the defendants had to post bail, or pay court fess in the thousands of dollars.

For her part, the trooper is firing back. She has appealed her firing and through her attorney, is claiming that the vast majority of her cases have been upheld.

It appears to be more complicated then that. The State Attorney in her area has announced that he would not pursue any driving charges where she was the arresting officer.

More evidence has piuled up against Ms. Steed. A 2010 police memo found that 20 marijuana based driving cases where the trooper made an arrest showed later that no drugs were ever found in any of the defendant’s systems. The memo goes on to state that Ms. Steed would report that the drivers showed visual signs of impairment, and the memo mentioned concerns that defense lawyers would begin questioning her credibility.

Another 2011 case highlighted in the lawsuit shows more trooper credibility problems. A man was pulled over in layton for swerving. The man had told the officer he had not been drinking and he passed all field sobriety exercises. Yet he was still arrested. He was booked in jail and passed a blood alcohol test. All charges were eventually dropped.

In another case, Ms. Steed pulled over a lady for speeding. The woman, despite not drinking, was accused of DUI and arrested. Like the others, her charges were all dropped.

According to the lawyer in the lawsuit, he suspects that there were literally 100s of bad arrests.
Continue reading

by

Like the lawsuits against big tobacco in the 1980s and following in the footsteps of a nearby Indian reservation, five inmates in the Idaho Department of Corrections are suing major beer companies. Why? They are blaming their legal troubles on alcoholism and claiming they were not warned about the dangers of drinking…

According to the Idaho Statesman, the five Idaho inmates filed the lawsuit without a lawyer. It names a total of eight defendants including Coors, Miller brewing and Jim Bean.

The inmates, Keith Brown and co-plaintiffs Jeremy Joseph Brown, Woodrow John Grant Cory Alan Baugh, and Steven Todd Thompson also wrote affidavits explaining how alcohol has affected their lives.

Keith Brown, after fleeing to Florida, was found and later convicted of voluntary manslaughter. He has spent nearly 30 years behind bars. In his affidavit, Mr. Brown claims that he spent all this time in prison because of alcohol and people being intoxicated. He continued, “At no time in my life, prior to me becoming an alcoholic, was I ever informed that alcohol was habit forming and addictive.”

Another potential Plaintiff, 34 year-old Jeremy Brown is currently serving 20-30 years for aggravated battery against a man in 2001. He claims he was drunk at the time and if it wasn’t for that fact, he never would have shot the man. He too is claiming he had no idea that alcohol is potentially habit forming!

Mr. Baugh is serving 7-10 years for a grand theft and drug convictions. Mr. Grant is serving time for aggravated battery and drug charges. 44 year-old Mr. Thompson is serving three more years of prison for grand theft and multiple drug charges. They all say the same thing: because of alcohol, they fear that they cannot be productive members of society and so want someone to blame…What are the legal odds of this case being a winner? As a Pinellas county law firm that specializes is criminal defense and personal injury, this case looks like it is going nowhere fast. Unlike the infamous McDonald’s hot coffee case there should be no surprises even if this case gets to a jury. Alcohol consumption and it’s possible side affects have been widly known for hundreds of years. Unlike “Big Tobacco”, there is no evidence that alcohol companies have purposely tried to hide their dangers.

Finally, this case should put off a large percentage of any jurors. It looks like these men are not taking responsibility for their actions, rather they look like they are just after a quick payday!
Continue reading

by

A guest post by Joseph Peterson, writing about computer crimes the potential penalties…

Cyber Fraud: An Emerging Trend

Over the past few decades, the amount of information that we store in virtual databases has skyrocketed. Now, almost every aspect of a person’s life is available in some form or another in cyberspace. However, this can create the potential for others to use and exploit this information for personal gain, including impersonating others or otherwise committing fraud.

In order to combat this potential issue, legal regulations of cyber technology use have been developed throughout the country. The exact details of these regulations can vary significantly, both between different states (such as Florida) and between state and federal authorities. However, in many cases, cyber fraud is treated as a very serious crime, with penalties ranging from fines and community service to long prison sentences, depending on the nature of the crime itself.

Forms of Cyber Fraud

Cyber fraud, broadly speaking, is the use of internet technology to commit an act of fraud. This can encompass a wide variety of different acts, and in some cases, the line dividing legitimate use of the internet from fraud can be quite thin. However, a number of acts are generally recognized as being fraudulent in all or most cases. These include some of the most common forms of cyber fraud, such as:

• Use of another person’s identity to purchase goods • False or misleading online marketing • Identity theft• Health insurance fraud • Ponzi or pyramid schemes • Advance payment fraud
All of these potential criminal actions can put those who are accused of committing them in an extremely compromised legal position. For this reason, it’s important to be aware of the cyber fraud regulations and penalties in Florida.

Unfortunately, sometimes the language of the laws against cyber fraud can be so vague that it can create a potential situation in which a person may not be aware that what they are doing is against the law. Because of the serious implications that a conviction for the crime of cyber fraud may have for the rest of a person’s life, it’s important that those who have been charged with this crime speak with a qualified criminal lawyer to help defend themselves in this situation.
Continue reading

Contact Information
Main Office
4707 140th Ave N
#104
Clearwater, FL 33762
Local: 727-286-6141
St. Petersburg Criminal Defense Lawyers
146 2nd St N
#310
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
*By appointment only Local: 727-286-6141

The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. This information is also available on our web site. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.

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 – 2024, Blake & Dorsten, P.A.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design