Florida Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

A posh South Florida day spa was put on a year probation for hiring

unlicensed workers and allegations that a woman was sexually assaulted at

the spa.

Six former cheerleaders and the former mascot from Morton Ranch High School made their first court appearances last week on hazing charges based on allegations that they pushed junior varsity cheerleaders, bound and blindfolded, into a swimming pool.

The misdemeanor charges state the defendants engaged in reckless conduct that endangered the mental and physical health and safety of the junior varsity cheerleaders. “We were bound by our shoulders and our wrists and blindfolded. And they started throwing water-balloons, hitting us with noodles, spraying our faces with hairspray. One of the girls was talking — one of the varsity cheerleaders put Silly String in her mouth. And some of the girls started crying. That’s when they stopped everything,” Laura DeLaCruz, 14, said Wednesday.

The incident, alleged to have occurred at a private residence, took place because the junior cheerleader was pledging and being initiated into the varsity squad. The girls, who will be tried as adults, face probation and community service to six months in jail and a $2,000 fine if convicted of the class B misdemeanor charges. The girls were ordered to reappear before state District Judge Larry Standley on Dec. 12 who will ultimately determine the punishment imposed if convicted.

A jury convicted a woman last Wednesday of three minor offenses in her role in an internet cyber-hoax which likely drove a 13-year old girl to suicide. Although originally charged with felony charges of accessing a computed without authorization to inflict emotional distress, the jury found defendant Lori Drew guilty of three lesser counts including accessing a computer without authorization. The parents of 13 year old Megan Meier alleged that their daughter was a victim of cyber-bullying which led her to commit suicide in October of 2006. Megan who sometimes suffered from low self-esteem was befriended on the social network MySpace by a boy who quickly became friends and eventually built a relationship with her over the network. Weeks later, Megan began to receive cruel messages from the boy’s account calling her a slut, fat and telling her that he no longer wanted to be friends. The cyber exchange devastated Megan, who was unable to understand how and why her friendship unraveled. The stress and frustration was too much for Megan, who had a history of depression.

Following her suicide the parents discovered that the boy never existed in the first place and that it was actually a hoax created by a mother, who had learned of the page from her own daughter and was using the fake boy’s profile to monitor their daughter’s activity. However, once accessing the fake account, Lori Drew began harassing and bullying the young girl until she hung herself in her own closet. Each conviction Drew faces could result in as much as one year in prison and a $100,000 fine. Sentencing is likely to be determined by the end of the month. Cyber-bullying is not uncommon among teenagers. In fact, almost one half of teens say they have been a victim at least once. What makes this case so troubling is that the bullying came from an adult and not one of Megan’s peers. The Meier family has since taken up the cause of Internet safety by trying to inform all parents of the dangers of cyber-bullying and pushing for parents to be mindful of their children’s online activities and relationships in the hopes that they can prevent further tragedies.

An 8 year old Arizona boy was charged last week with the premeditated killing of his father and another man.

The news of the shooting became public when the prosecutors released to the news this week an hour long interrogation which led to the boy’s confession. On the video the boy first denies firing the gun which killed both his father, Vincent Romero, 29, and Timothy Romans, 39, a boarder in the Romeros’ two-story home in St. Johns, a rural community outside of Phoenix. However, after an hour of questioning and while on tape, the boy changes his story and admits shooting them twice, saying that they were already wounded before he fired.

Even though now in the public eye, this confession will likely never see the courtroom experts say. Since the confession came while the child was being questioned and occurred before the police ever told the boy of his right to silence and to a lawyer, and because he was interviewed without a parent or a lawyer present, it is likely to be deemed inadmissible. Although the prosecution claims the reason the child was not told of his rights or able to have a parent or lawyer present was because he was not a suspect at the time of questioning, this argument will likely fail. As soon as the questioning revealed he was no longer a victim and might be a suspect that’s where the questioning should have stopped. At this point the boy was likely under a custodial interrogation at which time his constitutional rights were violated and the confession would be inadmissible. The boy is being held in a juvenile detention center, though he is to spend Thanksgiving with his mother on a 48-hour furlough. Police are also pushing for the 8 year old to be tried as an adult; however, most experts would agree that this would be more than extraordinary given the child’s young age and lack of criminal history.

A former escaped inmate who killed a New York state trooper and wounded two others while on the run in 2006 cannot withdraw his guilty pleas and stand trial, an appeals court ruled Friday.

The man, Ralph “Bucky” Phillips told the judge in November 2006 that he was “guilty as hell” of murder as well as several other charges in the killing and wounding of state troopers who were staking out his former girlfriends home. Phillips argued last week in front of an appellate panel that he had only voluntarily entered his pleas because of bad advice from his court-appointed counsel.

In accepting guilty pleas, the court must inquire whether the defendant is pleading voluntarily, knowingly, and understandingly, and the adjudicative element inherent in accepting a plea of guilty must be attended by safeguards to insure the defendant what is reasonably due in the circumstances. Those circumstances will vary, but a constant factor is that when a plea rests in any significant degree on a promise or agreement of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to be part of the inducement or consideration, such promise must be fulfilled. Phillips contends he pleaded guilty because his trial lawyer falsely told him that if he didn’t, his former girlfriend and their daughter could be imprisoned as accessories. The judges countered that Phillips “stated at the time of the plea that he was satisfied with the services of his attorney.” The 46 year old is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole.

A woman filed suit Thursday against a Delaware based radio-station after she was set up on a date with a man over the air and was subsequently raped.

Attorneys for the victim filed a lawsuit against Travis Harvey, charged in the crime, and Delaware-based NextMedia, parent company of WXLC, claiming the station should have done a background check on the man they were promoting as a “great guy,” although he was a convicted felon. ` The victim claims that the radio station ran the “Win a Date with Travis” competition last year. The radio station said Travis Harvey of Gurnee was a “great guy” and “kind.” But as a busy single father, Harvey couldn’t find the time to meet the right woman.

Harvey, 46, pled guilty to sexually assaulting the 24 year old and was sentenced to 2 years probation and 12 months periodic imprisonment last week. The civil lawsuit seeks financial compensation from both Harvey and the radio station. Although Harvey and the victim were set up on a radio sponsored event, it was on the second subsequent date that the assault occurred. She is seeking $50,000 in damages reportedly from the costs of therapy, counseling as well as emotional distress.

Victoria’s Secret, the US lingerie firm, is facing the prospect of being sued by dozens of American women who claim their bras brought them out in painful rashes and welts.

The original claim was brought by Roberta Ritta, 37, who claims that after purchasing the Angel’s Secret Embrace bra it caused her welts that were very red, extremely inflamed, and blistery. Her lawyers say they purchased the same bra types that Miss Ritter had bought and had them laboratory tested. They claim the tests revealed that the bras showed traces of formaldehyde, which is used in the textile industry to make fabrics crease-resistant.

Although one might assume that Victoria Secret was just another victim of frivolous lawsuits brought against the lingerie giant, they were sued earlier this year when a customer claimed they were hit in the eye by a diamond that shot off her underwear, now several other customers are claiming the same types of injuries associated with the underwear. A spokesman for Victoria Secret has denied that formaldehyde is used to produce its bras. Victoria Secret’s liability will ultimately rest on their knowledge and use of any dangerous chemicals in producing their bras, their level of precaution, as well as the possibility of any contamination after manufacturing. A judge next year will decide the fate of the lawsuit as well as the viability of a potential class action suit. Until then, if you or anyone you know owns any of the alleged “toxic bras” you should be cautious, especially if you’re allergic to formaldehyde.

A sex offender had to be restrained from attacking a group of Northern California reporters with a box cutter when they tracked him down for failing to register as a sex offender. Darren Kawamoto, 44, was put in police custody last Tuesday evening after a violent outburst directed at both reporters and their camera crews. Kawamoto’s was previously arrested for sodomy and oral copulation with a victim younger than 14, a sex crime. However, under California law, since Mr. Kawamoto did not have a permanent address, he was at his mother’s house at the time of the incident, he did not have to let the authorities know of his whereabouts in order to comply with the sex offender registration once he was released from prison. Once the media got word of his whereabouts they went to confront the man for not letting authorities know exactly where he was. Upon reaching the door, the media was verbally assaulted by the man who even pulled out a box cutter and threatened to cut them if they aired the video and did not leave.

It is unfortunate when someone feels like their right to privacy has been compromised to the point that they lash out. However, what Mr. Kawamoto did was completely uncalled for and should be punished. This was not a case of self defense and being that this was his mother’s home, she should have been the one to force the media to leave, not Mr. Kawamoto. This assault charge will likely stick not just because of the verbal threats made but because of his ability to actually carry out them out. Coming from someone with a violent past, it seems like Mr. Kawamoto’s actions will send him behind bars. Although the media is not completely innocent in this case, you cannot blame them for trying to take action to inform their residents about sex offenders when these types of registration loop holes exist in the law.

Are red light cameras a help or a hindrance to traffic safety? Are they even constitutional at all?

Legal challenges are popping up in several towns all over the country involving this same issue. A town in Ohio was even willing to boot every single member of their own city council for approving the use of these red light camera machines. Although most courts have side stepped the constitutional question to these red light cameras, the Minnesota Supreme Court in April 2007 found their camera laws did violate the Constitution on procedural grounds. Critics of these camera laws contend that by citing vehicles who go through these lights without identifying the driver is like convicting a gun for murder. Some towns were even caught shortening the length of yellow lights in order to help raise revenues.
On one hand these traffic lights are necessary for the protection and safety of drivers from those who without such measures would recklessly disregard these lights. Drivers that routinely run red lights are a threat to others as well as themselves. On the other hand if a city is going to implement red light cameras they should be forced to invest in the technology necessary to identify both the vehicle and the driver before issuing such a citation and if such a claim is made, the burden of proof should still be on the state to prove the driver’s guilt. Red light cameras should remain a useful tool to help convict dangerous drivers so long as the line is not crossed making them simply a taxing method to bypass citizen’s rights in order to raise revenues.

Later this month Michael Vick will appear in front of a Sussex County Judge and is expected to plead guilty to state charges of dog fighting. Vick, the former superstar NFL quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons has been serving his 23 month sentence on federal charges for dog fighting for which he is scheduled for release on July 23rd 2009. The Surrey County Commonwealths Attorney Gerald Poindexter recently said that Vick would be likely given the same deal he gave to his co-defendant Quanis Phillips–a three year suspended prison sentence and a fine of $2,500 so long as he remains in good behavior during the terms of his probation. It is likely that once Vick takes the deal his attorneys will attempt to move Vick to a half-way house for the remaining six months of his federal sentence so that he can prepare to transition back into society.

People deserve second chances especially those who have owned up to their mistakes. Vick has made it very clear that he will attempt to make an NFL comeback despite his two year suspension from the league. Although his former Falcons team and their owner have made it clear that it will not be with them, it’s inevitable that at least one team will give him a second chance if they have the opportunity. However, once released, the NFL will have the final say on his reinstatement and ultimately whether he is given his second chance in 2009.