A few weeks ago, I had the honor and privilege of defending my long- time friend, Robert, before a Brevard County Jury. Robert had been arrested following an incident at his home in Indialantic, Florida. It seems that in January this year, Robert was sitting in his home office working on his computer when he noticed, on his home surveillance camera, a suspicious car pull into the driveway directly across the street from his drive way. More concerning was the fact that the passenger of the car, got out of the vehicle, pulled a hoodie over his head and face, and ran towards Robert’s open garage. Now Robert, who had been robbed twice before, had expensive equipment for his business stored in his garage, but also, his inside garage door was not locked so the burglar now running into his garage would have total access to his home through his garage which the burglar was illegally entering. Robert’s first thought was to get his weapon so he could defend himself and his home, so he ran through his house to his bedroom and grabbed his gun, as he is lawfully allowed to do, to potentially defend his life and property.

When he came out of his bedroom, now armed, he realized he had a problem. In that short period of time where he ran to retrieve his weapon, he now did not know whether the burglar was in the garage, or had entered his home. He decided his best course of action was to exit his house through his front door, and look into his garage from the outside, his back to his lawn. Worst case scenario, at least he would be outside with the burglar in the home. As he exited the front door of his home, gun in hand, and looked towards his garage, he saw the burglar running down his driveway carrying some stuff from his garage. He didn’t know what the “stuff” was but made the educated guess that since the burglar was empty handed when entering his garage, and carrying items when he left, that Robert was being robbed.

The burglar was running from his home with Robert’s property in his hands, and in the split second he had to think about it, he decided to give chase. He ran down the driveway of his home and the burglar/criminal ran across the street, jumped into his accomplice’s car, and the driver of the car immediately gunned the engine and started to move forward for the getaway.

Unfortunately, Robert had already chased the burglar into the road and was now standing in front of the car, so when the car started to move towards him, in an instinctive “OMG, he is going to run me over” moment, he shot one round into the vehicle that was coming at him and the burglar and his vehicle immediately turned away and drove down his dead end street, through a yard, onto a bike path and made their getaway. Robert immediately went into his home, calls 911, and reports the incident. He cooperates with the Police in providing copies of his surveillance video of the burglar and the incident. The police never found the burglar or his accomplice.

But here is the rest of the story: The State Attorney’s office, in its infinite wisdom, decides a few weeks later to have Robert charged with open carry of a fire arm and discharge of a fire arm in a public place. They offer Robert a deal if he will agree to enter a pre-trial diversion program, give up his concealed weapons permit, be on probation for a year, submit to drug and alcohol testing, and allow the state to confiscate his legally owned weapon; Otherwise, he would face a trial, potential jail time, and potential criminal record on his otherwise unblemished history while living and working in Brevard County for more than 30 years. In effect, the crime victim now became the criminal.

Robert called me to defend his interests, and we took the case before a Brevard County Jury. After 10 hours of trial which cost the state, my client, the court system and the jury many thousands of dollars in time, travel, lost wages, and aggravation, the Jury found Robert not guilty in approximately 20 minutes. We are still fighting with the State to recover Robert’s legally owned weapon which was confiscated by the police as part of their investigation. In a subsequent hearing the State Attorney objected to the return of my client’s gun back to him even though a jury of his peers found him not guilty so we have now come full circle: It started with a thief running into Robert’s house, Robert defended himself and he becomes the criminal. Now the State has taken Robert’s gun legally and is fighting to keep his gun making the State the thief.

Did we lose all sense of right and wrong during this episode? My position from the beginning was that we were not going to stand by and let Robert get a criminal record when he was being robbed and defending his property. The system worked, justice won out, the jury has spoken but now must continue to fight against the State to recover his lawfully owned property. The fight goes on, and justice will prevail.

When you find yourself being taken advantage of by a burglar or the state, call the law office of Morgan & Barbary or visit our website at www.Legalproblem.com. We will be there to defend you and try and put logic and good sense back into the legal system.

A nice fellow dropped by the office recently, wondering if he could remove a felony from his record by sealing it. I took a look at it and discovered that he had been arrested for Possession of a Controlled Substance, gone to court without an attorney, and entered a plea, all without ever receiving any legal advice from an attorney.

The judge seemed very nice and the prosecutor offered a nice resolution, with no jail or extra fines, and only one year of probation. He took the deal, and completed the terms of the agreement without any problems.

Now, quite a few years later, he is finding that the felony case from the past is preventing him from being able to get decent employment in the present. Sadly, that nice deal that he received to resolve the felony involved an adjudication of guilt, and now he is a convicted felon with no ability to remove the case from his record. He can’t get a decent job. Or vote, for that matter.

This particular combination of events is occurring every day in courtrooms around this state, with negative effects that continue for the remainder of the defendant’s life. Someone goes to court and settles a case alone, without knowing the consequences of their decision. Later, the damage can not be undone.

I can not emphasize enough the importance of speaking with an attorney before attempting to resolve a case. Many criminal defense attorneys do not charge for an initial consultation and the simple decision to sit down in a room with an attorney can be critical.

Another mistake that some defendant’s make is to wait too long to retain an attorney. After an arrest for a felony in Brevard County, the case may go through the hands of three different prosecutors before being resolved. The sooner that an attorney on the side of the defendant begins working on the case, the better the chances of a reasonable resolution in the case.

After a felony arrest, the evidence gathered by the police is sent to the Intake Prosecutors at the Office of the State Attorney. They decide what charges to file, and, in fact, whether to charge the defendant with a crime at all. Law Enforcement officers arrest someone, in theory, based on probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, whereas a criminal case has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That means that an arrest may be supported by the evidence, but that same evidence is simply not of the quality or quantity to support a charge. As a result, many cases that come in following an arrest are dropped by the Intake Prosecutors. The charging document regularly used in Florida is an Information, and when the State files a Notice of No Information, that document states that the State is not going to be charging the defendant at all. If the defendant is asked about this criminal case, he or she may admit that they were arrested, but state that they never were charged.

When the Intake Prosecutors are deciding what to do with a case, before they have filed the
Information, an attorney can affect that decision sometimes. For example, sometimes witnesses to the incident can be revealed that the police never questioned. Perhaps someone has a video that the police have not seen. Sometimes, the attorney can convince the State to file the charge as a misdemeanor rather than a felony. The time when the Intake Prosecutors have the file can be critical to the outcome of the case.

In cases where felony charges have been filed, most cases proceed to the second set of prosecutors, the Early Resolution Prosecutors. Their job is to make an offer to resolve the case immediately, to winnow the cases that don’t need to be tried. Generally, this is the stage where cases are resolved where the evidence is certain and the offer to resolve the case is reasonable. Some cases are eligible for a nonplea resolution, such as Pretrial Intervention, resulting in the charges being dropped after the program is completed. The advice and help of an attorney is critical at this stage as well.

If the case is not resolved at Early Resolution, the file is sent to the Trial Attorneys at the State Attorney’s Office. This the last stage in resolving a felony case. They don’t actually pick juries on the majority of cases and it is important for a defendant to have an attorney representing them at this stage as well. Whether through negotiations or jury trial, good representation is critical.

So, in most felony cases, there are three different prosecutors who may offer a resolution that is acceptable to the defendant. It is critical that a person accused of a crime have good legal representation in a case from the very beginning, regardless of how overwhelming the evidence or how soon the case is closed.

Darrell Sedgwick, Criminal Defense Attorney

Morgan & Barbary

legalproblem.com

Florida law recognizes that its citizens have a right to privacy, and the Florida Constitution limits the courts from compelling disclosure of information that is not necessary for the court to determine the issues before it. However, defense attorneys in personal injury cases often try to get as much information about a plaintiff as possible, from medical records and bank statements to phone records and Facebook posts. Florida rules of civil procedure allow a defendant to obtain discovery of any non-privileged matter that is relevant to the subject matter of the case. For example, if a person is claiming injury in a car accident, it is reasonable for the Defendant to request and review the plaintiff’s medical records relating to his treatment for the accident. But sometimes, defense requests for private information from plaintiffs goes far beyond the scope of what is reasonable or even relevant. They are searching for any and all information that might not only bolster their case and serve their interests, but that which might discredit the plaintiff.

This was the sort of issue addressed in the recent case of Muller v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., before the Florida Second District Court of Appeals. The case arose from a 2012 auto accident in which the plaintiff was struck by a truck belonging to Wal-Mart and driven by one of its employees.  The plaintiff sought damages for permanent injury, pain and suffering, aggravation of pre-existing conditions, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of life enjoyment, medical expenses, loss of earnings and earning capacity.

In the course of the discovery process, it was revealed plaintiff had served in the U.S. Army for more than a decade before he was honorably discharged in 1993. During his service, he was stationed in Korea, Berlin and Iraq. In that time, he had suffered three injuries. However, he was not seeking damages in this negligence case for aggravation of any military injuries.

The defendant then requested that the plaintiff produce his entire military personnel file and medical records, as well as his DD Form 214 which would contain information about the plaintiff’s military service, including information about the plaintiff’s separation from the military that the form identifies as sensitive information.

The plaintiff objected to the request, arguing that it asked for irrelevant information and was a violation of his right to privacy under the Florida Constitution. The plaintiff requested that the court at least inspect the records in camera before it compelled him to produce them. The defendant argued that the information was necessary, in part to determine the plaintiff’s ability to observe and understand his surroundings when the accident occurred. The trial court granted the defendant’s request, without an in camera review of those records, and plaintiff appealed.

At the appellate level, the Second District Court of Appeals acknowledged that while the military records likely contained some evidence that would assist the defendant in its case, it was also true that the records likely contained information that wasn’t relative to the claims and would be “highly intrusive” to the plaintiff’s “private interests” if disclosed. The district court found that the trial court had departed from the essential requirements of law when it ordered the plaintiff to simply produce all of the records requested without the Court reviewing them first.  Therefore, the court held that the defendant’s right to discovery of the plaintiff’s military record was limited to those portions of the record that were relevant to the case and that the lower court must  conduct an in camera inspection of the records and separate the irrelevant documents from the relevant.

As a citizen of Florida and a veteran, I appreciate that the courts in Florida respect my right to privacy and will go the extra distance of reviewing my military records for relevancy before releasing them to an opposing party.   I feel better knowing that if I am ever injured in an accident and have to file a claim, the insurance company and their attorneys will not have complete, unrestricted access to all of my personal and private records.

Clay Morgan, Defense Attorney

Morgan & Barbary, PA,

Greater Melbourne, Florida and Brevard County,

legalproblem.com

Maybe your spouse or significant other is coming home late and not spending as much time with you as they used to. Maybe they seem distracted or are acting secretive. Maybe they are getting unexplained late-night calls or text messages. Or maybe you are going through a divorce and suspect that your spouse has been having an affair or is hiding marital assets. Whatever the scenario, you get the feeling that something just doesn’t feel right and want to find out what’s really going on. At this point it may be tempting to do a little spying on your spouse or significant other, but depending on how you go about it, it could be legally dangerous and might even land you in prison.

“Spying” can cover a wide range of activities; everything from accessing a spouse’s e-mail or Facebook account, to looking through their cell phone for suspicious phone numbers or texts, or digging through their web search history.   Some spouses have been known to use methods that are even more technologically sophisticated, such as installing key-logging software on a spouse’s computer that tracks every keystroke, setting up hidden cameras or recorders or attaching a GPS device to a spouse’s car.

So what kinds of “spying” activities are actually allowed?  It is perfectly legal to do a Google search on someone or to use a website in which you pay for publicly available information. Additionally, if your spouse is “friends” with you on a social media account, or posts messages that are public, any such postings are fair game and may be viewed by you and used as evidence in any divorce proceeding.  Many of these “spying” activities can also be legal if your spouse has previously given you permission to access password protected accounts or social media records.

There is also no problem with any information that is spoken directly to you by your spouse, or is sent or delivered to you in written form as these communications would be admissions from a party to the divorce.  This includes  any voicemails left on your cell phone as well as any emails or text messages sent to your cell phone by your spouse. Even if the voice mail, email or text message was sent to you inadvertently, it can still be legally viewed, retained, stored and used in any divorce proceeding. Additionally, anything observed in a public place or any conversations overheard in a public place where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy would most likely not be considered illegal and any information obtained would be admissible in court if it was relevant. You can also videotape or photograph almost anyone in a public place. Also, hiring a licensed private investigator to do investigative work or conduct surveillance on your spouse is legal. This type of professional would be allowed to testify in court regarding any information not obtained illegally.

Now let’s take a look at what types of “spying” activities would most likely be found illegal.

In Florida and numerous other states, recording someone during a phone conversation or in person without their knowledge and consent would be considered illegal if the conversation is in a nonpublic place. Even secretly picking up the phone and listening in to the conversation while other people are talking could result in evidence which would be inadmissible in court.

It is also potentially illegal to hack into your spouse’s password-protected cell phone, email or social media account. Looking through your spouse’s computer files (unless it is on your computer) without their permission could also result in inadmissible evidence, and any information obtained in this manner would most likely be excluded from any future divorce proceedings. Installing a GPS device onto your spouse’s car or key logging software onto their computer could also get you into legal trouble especially if you are not the sole owner of the car or computer. Additionally, if you’re thinking about installing hidden cameras or recording devices you need to be very careful about where they’re located, because installing those cameras on property not owned by you or in places where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, might violate wiretapping or other privacy laws. For example, you can install a home video security system that records video only, and which your spouse is aware of. However, if you installed the video system solely to spy on your spouse, and your spouse is totally unaware of the video system, you may have violated your spouse’s privacy rights.

Keep in mind that the law varies from place to place and situation to situation, so that what might be legal in one state may not be legal in another or under federal law.  The best advice I can give you would be to talk to your attorney before taking action to record, video, invade password protected accounts, or take any other action to obtain evidence in your case. Your attorney should be able to guide you through the evidence gathering process so that all the information you obtain will be obtained legally, be admissible in court and does not get you in trouble with the law.

Watch videos such as “What Should You Expect When Meeting About a Divorce” and other videos in our Video Gallery. See more articles from our attorneys at the law firm of Morgan and Barbary in our blog.

Morgan & Barbary,

Personal Injury, Criminal Defence and Family Law Attorneys