OUTCOME: A Jury found my Client Not-Guilty of Domestic Violence.
This started as a divorce case. My client, age 65, was married for 25 years with two adult sons and was a retired Architect. There was no love left and he wanted to be free. One month after the divor...ce was filed, he was at home printing paperwork and he heard his Wife behind him. She purportedly tripped. She then called the Police and accused him of pushing her and had him arrested for Domestic Battery. He was arrested, removed from the home and jailed. After he was released from jail, a mutual friend provided him shelter. His Wife next filed a DV Injunction in Family Court as a companion to the Divorce action. In Criminal Court, my innocent client asked for a Jury Trial. We returned to the home with a LEO and took photographs of the room where the alleged battery took place. The Table she claimed my client pushed her over had an ornamental Ship sitting on it. At Trial, his Wife testified the room was exactly the same as the day he pushed her. She could not explain why the Ship was not damaged. My innocent client also took the stand; he drafted a floor plan of the room to demonstrate it was not possible for him to have pushed her. After two hours, the Jury returned with a Not-Guilty Verdict. The Injunction was also dismissed. Justice prevailed in Criminal Court without the need for forensic science.
Criminal defense
State of Florida v. Russell M.
Jun 03, 2011
OUTCOME: Not-Guilty DWI Jury Verdict for my innocent Client.
The client was charged with Driving Under the Influence. After spending a night out with friends, Russell pulled into a local Denny's Restaurant to park. The Restaurant's dark Parking lot bordered a C...anal. When his new I-phone rang, he reached down to answer and drove into the bordering Canal. He was alone and not injured. Police arrived and Video taped a very sober Russell while he waited for his parents and his Truck was towed out of the Canal. Russell refused to take a Breath Test. The first officer on the scene advised Russell's dad that due to his Supervisor arriving, he would have to make a DWI arrest. At the Pre-trial Voir Dire, almost the entire Jury pool, admitted to driving while speaking on their cell phones, and a few admitted to having minor crashes. At Trial, the State played the Police Video of a quiet, polite and sober Russell. In his defense, Russell took the stand and testified that he refused to take the Breath test because he didn't trust the Breath Machine to provide a correct result. The Jury deliberated less than 5 minutes and found Russell "Not Guilty" of DWI. Russell and his parents were elated and I was happy that Justice prevailed for my young, innocent client.
Domestic violence
Jane Doe v. John Doe
Jun 01, 2010
OUTCOME: The Judge dismissed the Injunction for Protection Against Domestic Violence entered against my innocent Client.
I represented Jane, a South Carolina resident and sole custodian of her 5 year old son. Jane did not personally appear in a Florida Court for an Injunction Hearing (she sent Affidavits of Innocence i...nstead). A Florida Judge granted her Ex-husband (a legal alien from the Middle East) an Injunction for Protection of Domestic Violence against Jane, who works as a Professor. The Injunction potentially could affect her job status. When the Injunction was served on her in S.C., she contacted me about her innocence and she feared her Ex-Husband obtained the Injunction as a ruse and plan to kidnap her son again. [After getting sole parental custody from a US Divorce Court, the child was kidnapped by her Ex-Husband and held in the Middle East for 2 years living with his Father.] The sworn Petition accused Jane of Domestic Battery in the Middle East, when his son was taken from his home by three (3) masked men. He provided photos and a translated, Arabic Police Report. The translation included his statements to Police Authorities that three ( 3) masked MEN broke in to the home, brutalized him and took the child. Contrary to these statements he reported to Middle East Authorities, in Florida he testified at the DV Hearing it was JANE who broke in and brutalized him in the Middle East. This testimony was contrary to Jane's Affidavit of Innocence that his sworn Petition was false. The taped DV Hearing, which was transcribed, had no testimony or evidence of violence by Jane in the US. Yet, the Circuit Judge granted Jane's Ex-Husband an Injunction and a No Contact Order was issued against Jane.
We then provided the Judge with a Court Transcript from the taped DV Hearing which showed "no evidence or testimony" of violence by Jane. Despite the lack of evidence, the Judge refused to dismiss the DV Injunction and said it's "not his practice to grant a domestic violence Injunctions without evidence" and he blamed the Court Reporter for the lack of evidence in the DV Transcript. The Transcript included nine (9) places where "INAUDIBLE" was written. One example; the Transcript quoted testimony by the Ex-Husband: "I have a Ph.D from the University of... "INAUDIBLE". [Our Expert later found the time to be one (1) second.] The first Court Reporter did not list the time for each "inaudible" which was crucial. The first Transcript only included the time the DV Hearing started and the time the DV Hearing ended.
We filed a Notice of Appeal. Then I had an Expert Court Reporter with high-Tech Equipment listen to the Tape. This time the DV Hearing was transcribed adding testimony that could be heard with the high-Tech equipment and was corrected and added time increments whenever there was testimony that was "INAUDIBLE" and couldn't be heard. The time increments were included in the Second Transcript for testimony that was "inaudible". The DV hearing lasted about 15 minutes. The Expert Reporter determined the actual time of all "inaudible" testimony at the DV Hearing was twenty- four (24) seconds, total. That information conclusively proved there was no evidence presented to the DV Judge on the Tape Recording that Jane had committed domestic violence against her Ex-Husband. [After this case, a recommendation that Florida Statutes be amended to require time increments be mandatory in Transcripts of DV Hearings should there be TAPE RECORDED HEARINGS with inaudible testimony.]
Since we had an Appeal pending, we requested the Appeals Court to relinquish jurisdiction of the Injunction Case back to the lower court Judge, so he could review the Expert's complete Transcript of the DV Hearing, with time increments The Appeals court granted our request and returned the Case to the trial Judge. Upon the trial Judge's review of the Expert Transcript with time increments, showing no evidence of domestic violence by Jane, he reconsidered and dismissed the Injunction and No Contact Order. Jane returned to work as a College Professor in South Carolina and lives with her young son.
