Florida Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

By now, you’ve heard about Justin Bieber’s arrest on Miami Beach for DUI, resisting arrest, and having an expired drivers license. I watched the bond hearing very closely, along with his subsequent release from jail. The question that many are asking is whether Bieber was given the “Star Treatment.” In other words, was Bieber treated any differently than any other person charged with a crime here in Miami? The answer is “Absolutely yes!”

Let’s start with when the bond hearing took place. The strict jail rule followed daily is that all Miami inmates booked into the jail before 9 a.m. will appear before the judge on the afternoon bond calendar that same day. If, however, an inmate is booked after 9 a.m., he/she misses the cutoff and has to appear for bond hearing the following day. Bieber was booked into the jail at 10:30 a.m., well after the 9 a.m. cut off. That means he, like every other non-celebrity inmate should have been held at the jail for an additional day before appearing before the judge. That’s huge! I’ve never seen that accommodation made for anyone in my two decades in the criminal justice arena. Even other celebrities arrested in Miami haven’t been afforded the same treatment. In their defense, Bieber is a big star and probably poses some additional challenges to the jail than average Joe inmates and/or celebs like Dennis Rodman or Bobby Brown. By way of this article, I’m not judging. I’m just pointing out the facts.

Next, let’s talk about the bond hearing itself. I was surprised to see former Chief Judge Joe Farina handling the bond hearing. An extraordinary judge, Judge Farina appeared to handle just Bieber’s case, before all other inmates, at an earlier time than the non famous inmates. Bieber’s attorney even thanked Judge Farina on the record for his special accommodation. Don’t get me wrong, I would want the same special treatment for my clients and would also have passionately thanked the judge. Unfortunately, because most of the clients I defend aren’t “international mega superstars,” I couldn’t get that special treatment for them even if I hit my knees and begged for it.

Oh no! I’m sure I’m going to hear it again, “What the hell is wrong with you people in Florida.” As always, I’m going to respond with, “It’s just another isolated incident.” Candidly, many are finding it difficult to buy my argument, especially with yet another bizarre violent crime committed here in the Sunshine State.

It all occurred during the 1:20 p.m. showing of “Lone Survivor.” The previews were being shown. A 43-year-old father was reaching out to his young daughter via text messages while in a Pasco County, Florida movie theater (near Tampa). Apparently, a 71-year-old retired police captain officer, Curtis Reeves was disturbed by the texting. Reeves asked texter Chad Oulson to put his phone away. When Oulson refused, some arguing ensued. Reeves then went to alert one of the movie theater employees. A short time later he returned alone and was extremely irritated. According to witnesses, more arguing took place, then popcorn was thrown. Then, the unimaginable. Reeves pulled out a pistol and shoots. Oulson was killed and his wife was also shot in one of her hands while attempting to shield her husband. The shooter then sat down and placed the weapon on his lap.

The movie theater’s website includes a list of those items prohibited in the theater. Interesting to note that the list includes: no cell phone use, including texting, and no weapons permitted.

There’s been an extraordinary amount of outrage over a sentence recently handed down in a DUI Manslaughter case. 16-year-old Ethan Couch admitted killing four people while driving drunk. He killed four pedestrians while going 70 miles per hour in a 40 zone. Nine bystanders were injured and one of his passengers is still in the hospital with severe brain damage.

Couch’s blood alcohol content was a .24, which is three times the legal limit. He also had Valium in his system. It is unlawful for a minor to drive with any amount of alcohol in his or her system.

At sentencing, his attorney came up with such a novel argument, that even he was probably stunned that it worked. The defense argued to the judge that the convicted drunk driving teen was a victim. He was a “victim of wealth.” To support their position, the defense called Psychologist G. Dick Miller to testify that the teen suffered from the affliction “affluenza.” He explained that it’s a condition in which “his family felt that wealth bought privilege and there was no rational link between behavior and consequences.” Miller further shared with the court that Couch’s parents never punished him for behavior, even when police discovered the teen passed out in a vehicle with a naked 14-year-old girl (in a separate, unrelated incident).

Just days after George Zimmerman’s latest arrest, I wrote in my November 19, 2013 blog posting, that he will “probably” be acquitted. (see: https://www.floridacriminaldefenselawyerblog.com/2013/11/george_zimmerman_will_probably.html) I wrote that almost all the evidence that prosecutors had to prove that the aggravated assault and other accompanying crimes were committed would have to come from the lips of the alleged victim. I opined that based upon what Zimmerman was telling the world took place, which differed from what she was alleging, prosecutors wouldn’t have enough to carry their burden, which is proof beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.

With the latest development in the case, I feel confident substituting “probably” for “definitely.” I am certain that Zimmerman will “definitely” avoid conviction on the current charges.

The latest development is that the alleged victim, Zimmerman’s girlfriend Samantha Scheibe, claims that he is innocent and wants to get back together with him. While she initially called police to claim passionately that he was breaking her belongings and that he had pointed a gun at her in a threatening manner, she now claims that she was “misinterpreted by police.” She further claims in an affidavit submitted to the court requesting that Zimmerman’s bond conditions be altered to permit contact between the two, that when she was being questioned by the police, she “felt very intimidated” and that she may have “misspoken about certain facts” in her statement to police. She now specifically swears that Zimmerman “never pointed a gun at or toward my face in a threatening manner” and that “I want to be with George.”

I disagree with you Geraldo (Rivera). He tweeted this morning, “Hard to believe star quarterback Jameis Winston would not have been indicted for rape if he wasn’t leading FSU to a national championship.” That’s just not the case. I have no doubt that the reasons provided by prosecutors are the actual reasons Winston wasn’t charged. Whether the accused was a star athlete or simply John Q. Public who disinfects bowling shoes, I am confident that the announcement would have been the same. The evidence, the conflicts in the evidence, and lack of evidence supports their conclusions as to why they couldn’t file charges.

After an extensive investigation, prosecutor Willie Meggs announced, amongst other things, “We have a duty as prosecutors to only file charges if we have a reasonable likelihood of a conviction,” He further added, “We did not feel we could meet that burden.” He went on to say that law enforcement didn’t even have the requisite probable cause to arrest Winston, which is a much lower standard of proof required by prosecutors to prove the case in court. (“Beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt”)

During my over two decades in the criminal arena as both a prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, I’ve seen numerous cases where I question prosecutors’ conclusions after their investigations. This case is not one of them. The proof just wasn’t there.