Home » Gun Crimes

Articles Posted in Gun Crimes

Published on: | by

A prior firearm conviction can become powerful evidence in a new prosecution, but a jury cannot use it simply to conclude that a defendant has a criminal disposition. A recent Florida decision examined that distinction alongside a prosecutor’s closing argument and a prison sentence at the top of the guideline range. If you face a firearm charge, you should speak with a Clearwater criminal defense attorney about protecting your rights at trial and sentencing.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, law enforcement found a firearm and ammunition during an encounter with the defendant. Body-camera footage did not actually show officers removing the gun from the defendant, leaving knowing possession an issue for the jury. Federal prosecutors charged the defendant, who had a felony record, with possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon.

Reportedly, the prosecution offered the defendant’s record of a 2022 conviction for the same type of firearm offense. The defendant did not admit or stipulate to knowing possession in the new case. The district court admitted the prior conviction and instructed the jury to limit its use. During rebuttal closing argument, the prosecutor pointed to the defendant’s failure to deny ownership on the body-camera footage. Defense counsel objected, and the court sustained the objection. After argument, counsel sought a mistrial, which the court denied. Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Federal firearm prosecutions often involve more than determining whether a defendant unlawfully possessed a weapon. In many cases, the outcome also depends on a defendant’s criminal history and on whether prior convictions satisfy the Armed Career Criminal Act, which can significantly increase the mandatory minimum sentence. . In a recent Florida ruling, the court examined whether a defendant was entitled to relief after the Supreme Court issued a new ruling on the use of prior convictions to enhance a sentence. If you are facing federal firearm charges or any offense carrying enhanced sentencing consequences, speaking with an experienced Clearwater federal criminal defense attorney as early as possible can help protect your rights and your future.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the defendant was indicted in federal court for possessing a firearm after having previously been convicted of a felony. Because the government believed he had at least three qualifying prior convictions under the Armed Career Criminal Act, the prosecution sought the statute’s enhanced sentencing provisions. During the change-of-plea hearing, the defendant was advised that the enhancement would subject him to a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment. After acknowledging that potential penalty, he entered a guilty plea.

Reportedly, before sentencing, the probation office prepared a presentence investigation report identifying four prior convictions that it concluded qualified under the Armed Career Criminal Act. These included two Florida cocaine sale convictions from 1991, a Florida aggravated assault conviction from 1996, and a Florida conviction for possession with intent to sell or deliver a controlled substance from 1998. The defendant objected, arguing that the government had not adequately established that the two 1991 drug offenses occurred on separate occasions.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Federal drug and firearm cases often hinge on the government’s ability to investigate efficiently while respecting the constitutional protections guaranteed to every defendant. When delays occur between indictment and arrest, courts must determine whether those delays undermine the integrity of the prosecution or violate fundamental rights. A recent ruling from a Florida court illustrates how judges address these concerns in complex narcotics investigations marked by long investigative gaps and disputed law enforcement efforts. If you are charged with a drug crime, it is critical to understand your rights, and you should speak with a Clearwater drug crime defense attorney who can help you protect your interests at every stage of the process.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, federal agents intercepted a package containing cocaine and orchestrated a controlled delivery to a Tampa address in September 2019. A woman received the package and later handed it to two men, identified as the driver and the defendant, who placed it in a vehicle and traveled to an Orlando residence.

Reportedly, the men opened the package later that evening. Agents set up surveillance around the residence and secured a warrant. After entering the home, agents located cocaine and other drug-related evidence. The driver was arrested at the scene, while the defendant avoided apprehension. Continue reading →

Published on: | by

In Florida criminal cases, the law generally prohibits the prosecution from introducing evidence that the defendant previously committed crimes or other bad acts in order to establish guilt for the charged offense. As discussed in a recent Florida ruling issued in a gun crime case, such evidence can be offered for other reasons, such as demonstrating intent. If you are charged with a weapons offense, it is prudent to consult a Clearwater gun crime defense lawyer about your options.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the defendant was charged and convicted of knowingly possessing a firearm as a felon in violation of federal law. The events leading to his arrest occurred in February 2020, when Miami police officers responded to the sound of gunshots. As the officers neared the source of the shooting, they observed a silver car speeding away, leading to a high-speed chase through city streets. The vehicle drove recklessly, running red lights and stop signs before ultimately crashing. Inside the car, the officers found the defendant in the backseat. Firearms and ammunition were recovered from the vehicle’s rear floorboard. The car belonged to the defendant’s mother.

Reportedly, investigators linked the gunfire to a nearby apartment complex, where a man had been shot in the head. Spent cartridge casings from the scene matched the firearms found in the vehicle. Surveillance footage from the apartment complex also showed gunshots being fired from the back of a car resembling the silver car. Forensic analysis revealed gunshot residue on the defendant’s left hand. Before trial, the government filed a motion to introduce evidence of the defendant’s prior felony convictions for firearm possession in 2011 and 2014 to demonstrate his knowledge and intent. The defendant sought to exclude this evidence but was unsuccessful, and he was subsequently convicted. He then appealed.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

In the context of criminal proceedings, the defendant’s guilt typically hinges on the interpretation of circumstantial rather than direct evidence. When viewed in its entirety, if the evidence in question does not demonstrate the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant should be able to avoid a conviction. In a recent Florida ruling issued in a weapons crime case, the court discussed what constitutes adequate evidence to sustain a conviction, ultimately upholding the jury’s guilty verdict. If you are charged with a weapons crime, it is in your best interest to talk to a Clearwater gun crime defense attorney about your rights.

Background of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was indicted for knowingly possessing ammunition as a felon, a federal offense. During the trial, an FBI special agent described a search of the defendant’s family residence. During the search, ammunition was discovered in various locations, including a black backpack in the defendant’s closet. The jury found him guilty, and he appealed, arguing that the evidence presented during the trial failed to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for possessing ammunition as a felon.

Evaluating the Sufficiency of Evidence in Weapons Crime Cases

On appeal, the court ruled that the evidence put forth during the trial was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction for possessing ammunition as a felon. In doing so, the court explained that the test for determining whether evidence is adequate is the same regardless of whether the evidence is circumstantial or direct. While no greater weight is given to either type of evidence when the state relies on circumstantial evidence, reasonable inferences, not mere speculation, are necessary to support a conviction.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

If a person is suspected of a crime, he or she nonetheless has rights under the law, including the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Even if a person consents to a search, any evidence obtained during the search may be tainted if the consent was not properly obtained or if the search exceeded the scope of the consent.

A Florida district court of appeals recently discharged a defendant’s conviction based on a firearm found during a search, on the grounds that the state could not prove the weapon was found within the areas the defendant gave the police permission to search. If you were charged with a crime after the police searched your home, you should consult a knowledgeable Clearwater criminal defense attorney to discuss whether you may be able to preclude evidence found during the search.

Facts Regarding the Search of the Defendant’s Property

Allegedly, the police responded to a call that shots had been fired at the defendant’s apartment. Upon arriving at the scene, the police did an initial security sweep, in which they found shell casings and smelled gunpowder. The police escorted the defendant’s girlfriend and children out of the home, and the area was sealed until detectives arrived to conduct a shooting investigation. A detective arrived shortly thereafter and entered the home to secure the scene and begin the investigation. He later testified that this entry was not part of the protective sweep.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Some people mistakenly believe that circumstantial evidence is insufficient to convict a defendant of a crime. Direct evidence a defendant committed a crime is not required to support a conviction, however. In certain cases, what seems like trivial evidence can support a conviction for serious crimes.  For example, in a recent case, the First District Court of Appeal for the State of Florida held that eyewitness testimony alone was sufficient to convict a defendant of multiple felony charges. If you are a resident of Clearwater and are charged with a crime, you should consult an experienced Clearwater criminal defense attorney to discuss your case.

Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the victim and his cousin were sitting in a car outside of a nightclub when two men with guns opened the car doors and robbed the victim and his cousin and then shot and killed the victim. The cousin left with another relative and called 911. Later that evening, the defendant asked two women if he could use their phone. The defendant was sweaty and covered in grass, and reportedly told the women he was involved in an altercation in the nightclub and subsequently “unloaded a whole clip” into someone. The defendant proceeded to make phone calls with the phone borrowed from the women. A short time later, one of the women got a phone call from one of the victim’s friends and the defendant ran away. The women called 911 and the defendant was arrested based on their description. The women identified the defendant as the man who used her phone. Additionally, the victim’s cousin identified the defendant in a photographic lineup as the man who opened the rear car door.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

Florida has specific sentencing laws that govern the sentence for those convicted of crimes. There are a number of different ways that sentencing laws come into play, including mandatory minimums and increasing penalties for subsequent crimes of the same nature (think of DUI, for example). Your skilled Clearwater criminal defense attorney can help you to minimize the amount of time you need to serve by taking advantage of statutory opportunities to reduce the sentence.

Consecutive vs. Concurrent

Another example of a way that sentencing laws can affect the amount of time actually served is whether a sentence is served consecutively or concurrently. Let’s say someone is convicted of two crimes arising out of the same incident, with minimum penalties of five years each. The judge can order the defendant to serve the sentences consecutively, which would lead to a total of ten years in prison, because the sentences are served one after the other. However, in many circumstances, the judge can order the sentences to be served concurrently. Concurrent sentences mean that the sentences for all the crimes are served at the same time. So in this example it would be a total of five years, because both charges’ sentences would be served concurrently.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

The U.S. Constitution and Florida law protect people from unlawful searches and seizures by police officers. That includes stops and frisks on the street. Cops must have a reasonable suspicion to believe that criminal activity is afoot to stop someone in the first place and then have a separate reasonable suspicion to believe that you are armed and dangerous to frisk you for weapons, as Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal recently explained in a Florida gun crime case.A defendant was on probation when he was arrested and charged with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He was also hit with a new charge for violating the terms of his probation. The charges stemmed from an incident in which a worker at a restaurant called local police to tell them that a customer appeared to have a gun in his waistband. The employee said she never actually saw the gun and told the cops she wasn’t sure what the object in the waistband was. She pointed out the defendant as the customer in question when police arrived on the scene.

An officer who approached the defendant later told a judge that he saw a “bulge” in his waistband that appeared to be a gun. The officer didn’t know that he was a convicted felon at the time and didn’t ask whether he had a permit for a weapon. The officer instead proceeded to pat the defendant down. He found a gun on him in the process. A trial judge rejected the defendant’s request that the evidence be excluded from the case against him, arguing that the officer didn’t have a reasonable suspicion to frisk him at the time the weapon was recovered. The trial judge denied that request, but the Fifth District sided with the defendant on appeal.

Continue reading →

Published on: | by

There are several stages to a criminal prosecution and therefore several different opportunities to limit the impact of a conviction. Even if you are convicted of a crime, it is important to fight aggressively at the sentencing hearing to try to reduce jail times, fines, and other penalties. For instance, one question that may come up for a person convicted of multiple offenses is whether any jail time imposed for each offense should be done concurrently (at the same time) or consecutively (one after the other). Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal recently looked at that question in a Pinellas County gun crime case.A defendant was charged with aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer with the use of a firearm, stemming from an incident in which Pinellas County police officers were attempting to arrest him on separate charges. The cops were after him for a number of robberies, one of which allegedly happened with the use of a stolen gun. He was eventually convicted of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and sentenced to 20 years in prison for that crime. The judge said the prison time was to be served consecutively, or after the defendant finished his time on the robbery charges.

The judge rejected the defendant’s argument that the sentences should be concurrent (at the same time) because the incident with the police was part of the same criminal sequence as the robberies, which happened a day earlier. The judge said he was required under the law to impose consecutive sentences.

Continue reading →