Pasco Marijuana Defense Attorney 813-222-2220 – Drug Crimes – Cannabis

Drug2Go and Pasco Marijuana Defense Attorney have a fully searchable Pasco Drug Crimes Cannabis Marijuana defense database on marijuana and drug charges in Florida. This video discusses and Compares How to use probable cause in criminal cases and the possibility of drug charges being dropped or dismissed when police improperly search for and then seize contraband. Casey reviews the Minimum Mandatory sentences that may apply to some Drug Trafficking cases. W.F. “Casey” Ebsary, Jr. is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Attorney, a specialist who defends drug crimes in Pasco County, Florida.

 

Transcript: [Pasco Marijuana Defense Attorney Narrates] Hundreds of people are arrested every day. You may be one of them. I spend most of my time defending cases in State and Federal Courts. Many times drug crimes arise from searches of motor vehicles. Sometimes police will stop a car and then search it. Sometimes we are able to attack these searches when police do not have reasonable suspicion or probable cause to search the motor vehicle. In the event we can suppress the evidence, we may be able to have the drug charges dismissed, since there is no longer any evidence to be admitted against you in a criminal prosecution and evidence becomes unavailable for admission in a trial. I have arrived at my destination – one of the many courthouses in Tampa Bay where I help people. Let me help you. Criminal charges in State or federal Court? Let me help. Call me at 813-222-2220. Let me drive to court to help you.[End of Pasco Marijuana Defense Attorney Narration]

Hillsborough Cannabis Defense Lawyer 813-222-2220 – Video on Vimeo

Our drug crimes website has a fully searchable Cannabis Marijuana defense database on marijuana and drug charges in Hillsborough County,  Florida. This video discusses and Compares How to use probable cause and the possibility of drug charges being dismissed when police improperly search for and then seize contraband. Casey reviews Minimum Mandatory sentences may apply to some Drug Trafficking cases.

Here is a Direct Link to the Cannabis Defense Lawyer Video.

https://vimeo.com/centrallaw/hillsboroughcannabislawyer

Hillsborough Cannabis Defense Lawyer 813-222-2220 from W.F. Casey Ebsary Jr. on Vimeo.

Transcript:  Hundreds of people are arrested every day. You may be one of them. I spend most of my time defending cases in State and Federal Courts. Many times drug crimes arise from searches of motor vehicles. Sometimes police will stop a car and then search it. Sometimes we are able to attack these searches when police do not have reasonable suspicion or probable cause to search the motor vehicle. In the event we can suppress the evidence, we may be able to have the drug charges dismissed, since there is no longer any evidence to be admitted against you in a criminal prosecution and evidence becomes unavailable for admission in a trial. I have arrived at my destination – one of the many courthouses in Tampa Bay where I help people. Let me help you. Criminal charges in State or federal Court? Let me help. Call me at 813-222-2220. Let me drive to court to help you.

Other Topics covered at: https://vimeo.com/centrallaw/hillsboroughcannabislawyer

Marijuana, Cannabis, Drug Crimes, Hillsborough Marijuana Charges, Trafficking

Aaron Hernandez – Murder Trial – Prosecutor Wants New Judge

Aaron Hernandez Murder Trial, Prosecutor Wants New Judge, Recusal, Recuse
Aaron Hernandez
Murder Trial
Prosecutor Wants New Judge
Prosecutor Wants New Judge in Aaron Hernandez Murder Trial – Prosecutor has filed a Motion and stated they want a different Judge based upon some past history the prosecuting attorney’s office had with the Judge. The attorney for the Commonwealth tried to discuss the matter at sidebar, a tactic that would attempt to keep the allegations out of the public view.
In an unusual twist, ESPN broadcast the hearing live. The court spent a substantial portion of the hearing warning lawyers of the penalties associated with making media statements that have no legitimate law enforcement purposes.

Nice Review – Thanks

Reviews – Here is what people say about Casey on Google+.
“i had a bunch of questions in getting my husband back his license and he was the most helpful person!! thank you so much for taking time out of your day to call me back and help “
Written by: Google+
Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary, Jr.
5 / 5 stars

How to find a Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney

Tampa Criminal Defense, Reviews, Compare, Find, How to,

Tampa Criminal Defense Reviews

Criminal Defense

Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney narrates a one minute video on how and where to find a criminal defense lawyer in Tampa, Florida 33602. Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney, William F. “Casey” Ebsary, Jr. is a Lawyer who practices in criminal defense of all criminal charges in State and Federal Court. Casey is a former Assistant State Attorney / Criminal Prosecutor. Mr. Ebsary is AV rated by the Martindale Hubbell Directory and Lawyers.com. An AV rating is the highest rating issued by this nationally recognized lawyer rating service. An AV Rating shows that a criminal defense lawyer has reached the height of professional excellence. AV Trial rated Criminal attorneys have usually practiced Defense law for many years, and are recognized for the highest levels of skill and integrity.


  How to find a Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney


Visit or call a Board Certified Specialist 813-222-2220 Tampa Criminal Defense Lawyer – W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary, Jr. , knows that hundreds of people are arrested, questioned, and indicted in both Florida State and Federal Courts every day. That’s where a Florida Bar Board Certified Specialist, comes in. Board Certified Specialist, W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary practices extensively in the Federal Court in the Middle District of Florida. Our Tampa Criminal Defense Office in Tampa, Florida recently redesigned our Google Places / Google Maps pages. We have added Photos and videos.

You can visit Casey here. Law Office of W.F. “Casey” Ebsary, Jr.


 “We Can Help in Federal Court, we can provide solutions. Tell me your story.” 

Here are more Defense videos: 


Video Transcript: [Tampa Criminal Defense Lawyer Narrates] Hundreds of people are arrested every day, you may be one of them. I spend most of my time in court fighting state and federal criminal charges. I have arrived at my destination. One of the many courthouses in Tampa Bay where I help people. Let me help you. Have you got criminal charges in State or Federal Court? Let me help. Call me at 813-222-2220. Let me drive to court to help you. [End of Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Narrates]

Tampa Criminal Case – Video – High Profile Mistrial – Florida

Judge William Fuente, mistrial, jurors, premeditation, death penalty
Tampa Criminal Case
High Profile Mistrial
Florida
Criminal Defense experts agree that when the stakes are high, in a death penalty case, a Judge has to be extremely careful. 10, 15, or 20 years later when the ultimate price is to be paid the courts will be very careful to avoid executing someone who has not received a fair trial.

 

Judge William Fuente granted a mistrial in a high profile murder case where the alleged victim was a baby tossed from a moving car onto an Interstate highway in Tampa, Florida. “The jurors heard testimony they should not have heard under any circumstances. In this court’s conclusion, a mistrial is necessary,” Fuente said Tuesday morning. One juror was interviewed in the video clip below.


Radio Interview Clip

 

 

https://www.970wfla.com/media/podcast-am-tampa-bay-AM_Tampa_Bay/casey-ebsary-tampa-criminal-trial-attorney-23611050/


 

In this case, the witness, the alleged victim’s mother, brought into at least one juror’s mind the concept of premeditation. Premeditation is a essential element of a death penalty case under Florida criminal law. The statement was excluded during pretrial litigation. Judge Fuente’s ruling was spot-on. This is not the first time that Judge Fuente has been faced with issues that caused a mistrial in a high-profile case.

Recently, a juror had Googled a subject during the course of a trial. That caused Judge Fuente to declare a mistrial and to take action against the Juror. In another recent case, an emotional witness screamed out in front of the jury and the jury heard information that was not admissible. Judge Fuente had to grant another mistrial

It is not uncommon for lawyers to instruct Witnesses not to discuss certain matters that have already been decided by the court before the trial. In this case, I understand the prosecutor did not instruct the witness not to speak of certain matters. Consequently, the case will be tried again later this year.
Defense attorneys frequently must move for a mistrial when improper information has been in front of the jury. This is due to the general rule that the failure to allow the judge to correct a problem that has come before the jury during the trial renders that issue non-reviewable by an appeals court later on in the proceedings.
Judge William Fuente – Biography
Judge William Fuente was born in Key West, Fla. on May 21, 1945. He received his B.A. degree (in Biology) from the University of South Florida in 1974 and his J.D. degree from the South Texas College of Law in 1976. He also served in the U.S. Navy from 1967 to 1971.
Judge Fuente began his career in 1980 as an Assistant State Attorney, and was also in private practice lawyer until he was appointed to the Hillsborough County Court in 1994. In 1997, he was elevated to the Circuit Court. He has also taught as an adjunct professor at Stetson University College of Law.
Sources:
https://judgepedia.org/index.php/William_Fuente
https://blogs.lawyers.com/2012/11/juror-faces-jail-googled-defendant/
https://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/hillsborough-judge-declares-mistrial-in-machete-murder-case/1189018
https://tampa.cbslocal.com/2012/02/08/tampa-murder-mistrial-charles-chambers/

Florida Criminalizes Most Internet – Web Devices

Florida Criminal Defense Attorney has been researching a new law that may make anyone with a cell phone or computer with Internet access a person possessing an illegal gambling device. Specifically, the definition of “slot machine” may now include most web devices. When a law captures innocent conduct it can be void for vagueness. The law may also violate the Equal Protection Clause.

 

Internet Devices
Banned
Void for Vagueness
The State Attorney in Miami Dade has now been sued and the lawsuit alleges, “The definition of “slot machine or device” now contained in Fla. Stat. § 849.16, as amended, fails to adequately describe the prohibited machine or device such that a person of common understanding cannot know what is forbidden.
For your convenience we have highlighted the changes to the Florida Criminal Law:  The definition of a “slot machine” now includes: any machine or device or system or network of devices that is adapted for use in such a way that, upon activation, which may be achieved by, but is not limited to, the insertion of any piece of money, coin, account number, code, or other object or information,such device or system is directly or indirectly caused to operate or may be operated and if the user, whether by application of skill or by reason of any element of chance . . . .
The Florida Legislature rewrote  (Fla. Stat. § 849.094) to permit only retailers that conduct “a nationally advertised game promotion” to conduct games. The statute creates a protected class of nationally advertised game promoters. A 19 Count, Forty – page lawsuit has been filed challenging the new law. You can review the lawsuit here: https://miamiherald.typepad.com/files/internet-cafe-complaint.pdf
Equal Protection Violation
It has been alleged that, “Fla. Stat. § 849.094, as amended, accordingly violates the Plaintiff’s right to equal protection under the law because similarly situated businesses that happen to advertise game promotions nationally rather than locally are expressly permitted to employ the use of game promotions, but the Plaintiff is prevented from doing so unless it opts to advertise same nationally.”
The Florida Supreme Court has just invalidated a law on loud car stereos that attempted to allow loud political speech coming from motor vehicles. A protected class of political speakers was created in the Statute, just like the new gambling statute has created a class of national advertisers. We have previously written about that case here: https://news.duifla.com/2012/12/florida-court-loud-music-legal.html

 

Search Warrant | Cell Phone Update

Wurie, Cell Phone, Search, Warrant

Cell Phone, Wurie, Search, Warrant


Cell Phone Search Warrant Update


Florida Criminal and DUI Defense Attorney notes a Federal Court has lined up with the Florida Supreme Court in condemning warrantless cell phone searches “on a cell phone, carried on the person. Allowing the police to search that data without a warrant any time they conduct a lawful arrest would, in our view, create “a serious and recurring threat to the privacy of countless individuals .” Gant, 556 U.S. at 345; cf. United States v. Jones, 132 S.Ct. 945, 950 (2012)(“At bottom, we must ‘assur[e] preservation of that degree of privacy against government that existed when the Fourth Amendment was adopted.’ “ (quoting Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 34 (2001))). We therefore reverse the denial of Wurie’s motion to suppress, vacate his conviction, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”


 

 

Search Warrant for Cell Phone Handset – Required Florida Supreme Court Says

Cell Phone Search, iPhone Search Warrant, Search warrant

Cell Phone Search, iPhone Search Warrant

 

Search Warrant for Cell Phone Handset –
Required
Florida Supreme Court Says

Search Warrant for Cell Phone Handset Required


Florida Supreme Court Says a police officer is not authorized to search through photographs and information within a cell phone that was on defendant at time of arrest. Cell phone had been separated from defendant at time of search. Factually, images from defendant’s cell phone depicted a weapon that resembled the gun stolen from convenience store, as well as defendant and his fiancee posing with stolen money packaged in manner described by the victim, a convenience store clerk.
 
Cops in the case properly separated and assumed possession of cell phone from defendantin search incident to arrest. The Florida Supreme Court held a  warrant was required before information, data, and content of cell phone could be accessed and searched by law enforcement.  Notwithstanding decisions of other courts, Conformity clause does not meanFlorida courts must apply U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in United States v. Robinson in this case.
 
The Florida Court reasoned that  Robinson not factually or legally on point. Then in a stunner, the court found that the Good faith exception to exclusionary rule does not apply, since no bright-line rule exists for law enforcement officers to rely upon with regard to searches of electonic devices under facts of this case. 
 
 

Boston Marathon Bombing Criminal Complaint Download PDF Here

Boston Marathon Bombing Criminal Complaint is available here:

https://centrallaw.com/BostonMarathonBombingCriminalComplaintTsarnaev.pdf


Excerpts from Special Agent’s Affidavit:


 

bombing, Criminal Complaint Boston Marathon, terrorism, United States District Court,

Criminal Complaint Boston Marathon,

Boston Marathon Bombing
Criminal Complaint
Download PDF Here

“I submit this affidavit in support of an application for a complaint charging DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV with (1) unlawfully using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction (namely, an improvised explosive device) against persons and property within the United States …”

 

“I have reviewed videotape footage taken from a seculity camcra located on Boylston Street near the corner of Boylston and Gloucester Streets. At approximately 2:38 p.m. (based on the video’s duration and timing of the explosions) — i.e., approximately 1 I minutes before the first explosion –two young men can be seen turning left (eastward) onto Uoylsion from Gloucester Street. Both men are carrying large knapsacks.”

 

“Approximately 30 seconds before the first explosion, he lifts his phone to his ear as if he is speaking on his cell phone, and keeps it there for approximately 18 seconds. A few seconds afler he finishes the call, the large crowd of people around him can be seen reacting to the first explosion. Virtually every head turns to the east (towards the finish line) and stares in that direction in apparent bewilderment and alarm. Bomber
Two, virtually alone among the individuals in front of’the restaurant, appears calm.”

 

“In addition, from the scene of the shootout on Laurel Street in Watertown, the FBI has recovered two unexploded IEDs, as well as the remnants of numerous exploded IEDs.”
“The remnants of at least one of the exploded IEDs at the scene of the shootout indicate that a low-grade explosive had been contained in a pressure cooker. The pressure cooker was of the same brand as the ones used in the Marathon explosions. The explosive also contained metallic BBs contained within an adhesive material as well as green-colored hobby fuse. The intact low-grade explosive device found in the abandoned car was in a plastic container and wrapped with green-colored hobby fuse.”

“On April 21, 2013, the FBI searched DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV’s dormitory room at 7341 Pine Dale Hall at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, pursuant to a search warrant. The FBI seized from his room, among other things, a large pyrotechnic, a black jacket and a white hat of the same general  appearance as those worn by Bomber Two at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013, and BBs.”

“Based on the foregoing, there is probable cause to believe that on or about April 15, 2013, DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV violated 18 U.S.C. $5 2332a (using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction, resulting in death) and 844(i) (malicious destruction of property by means of an explosive devicc, resulting in death). Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Court issue a complaint charging DZHOKHAR  TSARNAEV with those crimes. Special Agent
Federal Bureau of Investigation”