Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney, Leslie Sammis, discusses a recent case result in a drug trafficking case decided in Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL.
Disclaimer: The Florida Bar does not review or approve case results for any lawyer's websites. If you would like to see the results we have obtained in the past and statements regarding the quality our work, you must read the disclaimer and request the additional information by clicking on the "I agree" button:
Past successes do not guarantee future results.
The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the cases discussed in our recent case results.
Not all results are provided.
The results discussed are not necessarily representative of the results obtained in all cases because each case is different and must be evaluated and handled on its own merit.
Case Dismissed after Attorneys Win Motion to Suppress Hearing - Client Avoids 25 Year Minimum Mandatory Sentence on Drug Trafficking Charges
Result: On October 22, 2009, the Honorable Denise A. Pomponio, Circuit Court Judge for Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL, heard from three witnesses during a hearing and then granted our clients motion to suppress evidence - more than 28 grams of Oxycontin. Because the motion suppressed all evidence in the case, Judge Pomponio then granted our motion to dismiss all charges including Count I for drug trafficking and Count II for obstructing or opposing an officer with violence. The client was completely not guilty of all charges in Case Number 2009-CF-011782.
Facts Leading to the Dismissal: Two narcotics detectives with the Temple Terrace Police Department in Hillsborough County, FL, received information from a confidential informant (confidential source) that a certain named individual with an outstanding warrant was "hiding out" at a certain address in a certain apartment complex. The Temple Terrace Detectives also had information about the type of vehicle the individual was driving, including the tag number. The Temple Terrace Police also had information from a law enforcement officer with the USF Police Department that this individual was selling drugs and guns at the USF college campus. The detectives went to that address after receiving the tip from the CI and saw our client driving the same vehicle and parking in front of the same apartment building.
As our client exited the vehicle, the officers approached our client and started questioning him about whether he was the individual they were looking for. Our client was not the person the police were looking for, although he was driving the same vehicle named in the tip from the confidential informant. In the process of detaining him, the Temple Terrace Narcotics Detectives alleged that they smelled marijuana coming from the vehicle and our client.
Although the Temple Terrace officers determined that our client was not the individual that they were looking for, they searched our clients vehicle based on the smell of marijuana and allegedly found more than 40 grams of Oxycontin pills under the driver's seat. The Temple Terrace Detectives also arrested our client for obstruction with violence after they said he tried to run and had to be wrestled to the ground.
The issue at the motion to suppress hearing was whether the officers had acted in good faith when the officers made a mistake relating to serving a valid arrest warrant. In deciding whether the "good faith" exception applied, the appellate courts have held that the search is constitutional if the officers reasonably and in good faith mistook the person arrested for the person with the outstanding arrest warrant. See McCrea v. State, 475 So.2d 1357 (Florida 4th DCA 1985); Neal v. State, 456 So.2d 897, 898 (Florida 1985) (where police have a valid outstanding warrant to arrest one person, and reasonably mistake a second person for the first person, then the arrest of the latter person is valid).
We were able to show the court during testimony at the suppression hearing that our client looked nothing like the individual wanted by the police, although both individuals were black males. Furthermore, we were able to show inconsistencies in the officers testimony about observations they made of our client before the stop occurred. We were also able to show that although the officers claimed that they all smelled marijuana before conducting the search of the vehicle, no marijuana was actually found, and the officers disagreed with each other during the motion to suppress hearing about whether they smelled burnt or fresh marijuana.
Information Upon Request Zone
Trafficking in Illegal Drugs (28 grams to 30 Kilograms) in violation of Florida Statute 893.135(1)(c)1c is a first degree felony that is punishable by a maximum of 30 years and has a minimum mandatory sentence of 25 years. This means that if convicted of that crime, the Court must impose the 25 year minimum mandatory sentence under many circumstances, and the client must serve that sentence day for day.
Filing and litigating innovative motions to suppress is often the most important part of fighting any drug trafficking case. These serious felony cases require a tremendous amount of work because your Tampa drug trafficking attorney must thoroughly investigate every issue in the case by taking the depositions of every state witness, filing the appropriate motions to suppress or motions to dismiss, gathering evidence to present at the hearing, and thoroughly preparing legal arguments addressing all of the relevant Florida case law on any particular issue in the case.
If you have been arrested for a serious drug offense such as trafficking in a controlled substance or armed trafficking in Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL, call an experienced attorney at the Sammis Law Firm to discuss your case today. Call 813-250-0500 today or visit our main website to learn more information about drug trafficking charges under Florida law at www.SammisLawFirm.com.
Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney, Leslie Sammis, discusses a recent case result in a possession of cannabis case with intent to sell case in Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL.
Disclaimer: The Florida Bar does not review or approve case results for any lawyer's websites. If you would like to see the results we have obtained in the past and statements regarding the quality our work, you must read the disclaimer and request the additional information by clicking on the "I agree" button:
Past successes do not guarantee future results.
The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from the cases discussed in our recent case results.
Not all results are provided.
The results discussed are not necessarily representative of the results obtained in all cases because each case is different and must be evaluated and handled on its own merit.
State Attorney's Office in Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL, DROPS All Charges on the Day of Trial.
Results in Case No. 2009-MM-017082 in Tampa Hillsborough County, FL before Lawrence M. Lefler, County Court Judge:
On October 26, 2009, the State Attorney's Office announces a "Nol Prosse" which means they dropped all charges on the day of jury selection. At the time, we had three motions pending: (1) a motion to suppressed based on a bad stop and prolonged detention; (2) a motion to dismissed based on lack of evidence of constructive possession; and (3) a notice of expiration of speedy trial which forced the prosecutor to pick a jury and proceed to trial on October 26, 2009, the last day of the 15 day recapture period.
Facts Leading to Case Being "Nol Prossed":
Our client was driving in Tampa when he was stopped by for not dimming his headlights. After the investigatory stop the officer determined that the head lights were not on high but were instead "improperly aimed." The officer then asked the driver and two passengers to search the vehicle. No drugs were found in plain view, but the Hillsborough County Sheriff did allegedly find marijuana which the officer thought was packaged in a manner consistent will the intention to sell the cannabis. Therefore the officer arrested our client for possession of cannabis with the intent to sell even through the amount of marijuana found was less than 20 grams.
After the arrest, the State Attorney's Office took 21 days to make a filing decision. During that time we discussed with the intake prosecutor the following motions that we could raise to prevent a successful prosecution:
Motion to suppress the initial stop since no traffic violation occurred, and no other legal basis existed to stop the vehicle;
Motion to suppress evidence since the detention was prolonged longer than necessary for the officer to figure out that he had no legal basis for the stop and/or figure out whether he was not going to issue a traffic citation;
Motion to suppress evidence since the detention was prolonged after the driver was told that no citation would be issued.
Motion to suppress warrantless search which was without free and voluntary consent, especially considering that under the circumstances, no free or voluntary consent was possible when three officers had surrounded the vehicle and continued the detention after allegedly telling the driver no citation would be issued.
Motion to dismiss or JOA motion because there was insufficient evidence of constructive possession as a matter of law when the driver was not the only person in the vehicle, no one claimed knowledge of the presence of the contraband, and the contraband was not in plain view.
Motion to dismiss or JOA motion because there was insufficient evidence to show that our client possessed the marijuana with the intention to sell solely because of the way it was packaged.
The intake prosecutor ultimately decided not to file the felony charges given all of the issues in the case, however the intake prosecutor did file charges for Possession of Cannabis less than 20 grams and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.
In a misdemeanor case under Florida law, the speedy trial period is only 90 days. The period trial ran on September 25, 2009 which was before the first disposition court date. After the speedy time period ran out, we filed a notice of expiration of speedy trial on October 9, 2009. That same day we also filed a motion to suppress because of the bad stop, prolonged detention, and lack of probable cause for the arrest. We also filed a motion to dismiss under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4) because the undisputed facts showed that despite the fact the marijuana was found in the vehicle, it was not in plain view and none of the occupants of the vehicle made any statements to claim ownership of the marijuana.
The Court scheduled a hearing on the notice of expiration of speedy trial within 5 business dates on October 15, 2009. At the hearing the Court was required to set the case for trial within 10 calendar days. At the hearing the Court ruled that it would hear the other motions immediately before trial and that a jury would be selected and sworn on October 26, 2009, the last day of the 15 day recapture period.
Instead of proceeding to trial on October 26, 2009, the State "nol prossed" or announced its desire to drop the charges of possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia. Our client was completely exonerated of all charges.
Information Upon Request Zone
Click here for more information on fighting possession of cannabis with intent to sell cases through the Tampa Bay and surrounding areas in Hillsborough County, Pinellas County, Polk County, Pasco County, Hernando County, or Manatee County, Florida. Call 813-250-0500 today to discuss your case with an attorney.
