These wounds, which allegedly include a fractured nose and cuts to the back of the head, could help the defense prove that Zimmeran shot his gun in self-defense and acted within the scope of the Stand Your Ground law. While the medical records seem to definitely indicate a struggle, they don't necessarily end the prosecution's case.
]]> The records state that Zimmerman was using prescription medications that could potentially have affected his personality and behavior, making him moody and irritable around the time of the Florida shooting. Also, just because Zimmerman sustained injuries in the altercation with Martin does not mean he couldn't have started the fight, the prosecution will likely argue.The prosecution can counter the evidence of injuries by saying that 17-year-old Martin was fighting for his against a man who would later kill him, so it is not abundantly clear how persuasive the medical records and head wounds will be in Zimmerman's self-defense argument. The defense will want to find some sort of either eyewitness or medical expert testimony to suggest that Zimmerman's wounds were the result of a clear attack on him and that it was reasonable for him to fear for his life and, therefore, shoot his weapon.
It is crucial for the jury in this high-profile case to sincerely evaluate the evidence before them and only the evidence before them. There is so much media coverage and broadcasted bias regarding this criminal case that should play no role in the jury's deliberation. Perhaps this new evidence of medical records will provide the mere doubt that the defense needs to prove its case.
Source: CBS News, "George Zimmerman's head wounds after Trayvon Martin shooting likely bolster self-defense claims," May 16, 2012
]]>Late last week, the defendant learned of his sentencing based on the guilty verdicts. His continued fight to appeal his convictions now might seem even more important. If the convictions stand, the 48-year-old polo mogul will serve 16 years in prison and be required to pay a $10,000 fine.
]]> There is still hope for the Florida defendant, as he and his legal team are still in the process of fighting for an appeal based on their theory of a juror's misconduct. A previous request for an appeal recently was rejected, but it didn't take long for the defense to find another reason to challenge the jury's deliberation process.The current request for an appeal is based on one's juror's method of coming up with his guilty verdict. As we have mentioned in past posts, he performed an experiment at home to see how the amount of alcohol that the defendant supposedly drank on the night of the accident would affect him. Basically, he relied on evidence that he made up himself and that wasn't presented in court.
Because the request for the appeal hasn't yet been rejected, the defendant has not yet started to serve his sentence. The judge is allowing him his freedom for the cost of a $7 million bond. He also has to wear a location monitoring ankle bracelet until matters get settled.
As the past few months have shown, this is a complex case with no shortage of twists and turns. We will continue to post updates with new developments.
Source: ABC News, "Polo Tycoon John Goodman Sentenced to 16 Years," Christina Ng and Kaitlyn Folmer, May 11, 2012
]]>In Florida, sentencing in drug cases remains quite strict, with men and women serving jail time for non-violent drug crimes. There has been and continues to be a push for sentencing laws to change in the state, a push that's been halted by Gov. Rick Scott since his election.
]]> Scott previously vetoed a legislative proposal that would have saved certain defendants from incarceration so that they could instead be required to go through drug treatment and counseling. The proposal was meant to save the state money by keeping non-violent offenders out of jail both immediately after a drug conviction but later as well. Counseling and treatment, the proposal suggested, would prevent past drug offenders from reoffending.The legislative proposal easily passed through the Senate and House, only for Scott to veto it and thereby halting the propped changes in drug sentencing. Supporters of the bill, however, continue to press on, with support from out-of-of state groups and advocates for effective justice and saving tax dollars. The Department of Corrections estimates that if the sentencing laws could decrease the prison population by 10 percent, Florida could save nearly $200 million.
Of course, for the proposal to be passed in the future, both the governor and the community will have to believe that the change wouldn't make it seem like Florida is easy on drug crimes. Drug laws can create much debate within a community; therefore, advocates for the sentencing change likely have a tough battle before them.
Source: Orlando Sentinel, "Florida still looking for balance between drug treatment, jail time," Kathleen Haughney, May 6, 2012
]]>A jury found the defendant guilty of DUI manslaughter and vehicular homicide, but the defendant and his defense team didn't take that verdict as the end of the fight for justice. A motion for a retrial was filed based on the suspicion that jury misconduct contributed to the quick guilty verdicts. A judge denied that motion. Even with that refusal, however, the defense's fight for a retrial does not end.
]]> As we shared in the previous post about this homicide case, there are at least a couple of reasons to believe that jury misconduct occurred before the guilty verdicts were read. The first motion for a retrial was tied to a specific juror's claim that he felt pressured by the other jurors to find the defendant guilty. The judge's recent refusal of a retrial is connected solely to that matter. Based on interviews with the other jurors, he didn't feel that the one juror's feelings about the process reflected the actual deliberation process.The continued fight for a retrial in the Florida DUI manslaughter case focuses on the suspicious activity we wrote about in the past post. Another juror from the same jury has raised eyebrows regarding juror misconduct. He wrote a book that describes how he performed an experiment outside of court to try to see how drunk he would get by drinking the same amount of alcohol as the defendant allegedly did before the accident took place.
The defense sees the juror's experiment as a violation of court rules. "Jurors must decide the case only on the evidence presented in the courtroom," argues the defense. Last Friday, a motion for a retrial was filed based on the juror's admitted suspicious activity. An investigation into how the one juror's experiment might have influenced the other jurors will take place in order to help the court decide whether this motion for a retrial has more merit than the last one.
Source: ABC News, "Florida Polo Tycoon John Goodman Denied First Motion For New Trial," Christina Ng, May 7, 2012
]]>We previously covered how the jurors of the criminal trial were brought in for interviews in order for the judge to determine whether any misconduct occurred. One juror claims that he felt pressured into giving a guilty verdict even though he individually felt otherwise, and now another juror's story about his process creates further worry.
]]> According to The Palm Beach Post, a juror took it upon himself during the criminal trial to perform an experiment. He thought it could help him make his decision in the case by drinking the amount of alcohol that the defendant allegedly drank before the accident. When he consumed the drinks and then woke up the next morning, he claims he felt that a person would have been too intoxicated to drive based on his experiment.There are potential problems with that juror's decision-making process. His experiment isn't evidence from the trial, and it's is evidence from the trial that a verdict should be based on. Also, individuals' reactions to alcohol are different. How the juror felt after he drank might not compare to how the defendant felt. Plus, it's possible that the defendant didn't drink what was stated during the trial.
This is just one more complication that could help the defense's motion for a retrial. Will the judge throw out the guilty verdict? We will find out soon.
Source: NBC 6 Miami, "Juror's Drinking Experiment in Polo Mogul DUI Case Questioned," Karen Franklin, May 4, 2012
]]>Our past post covered how the defendant was convicted of the criminal charge late in March. The case, however, has not concluded because of the vigilant fight from the defense. The team challenged the trial process that led to the guilty verdict, and now a new reported detail about the trial continues to fuel the defense's quest to get a new, fair trial.
]]> The Orlando Sentinel reports that the defense has challenged the trial process for various reasons. One of the big reasons is that it believes that jury misconduct resulted in the guilty verdict. The judge interviewed the jurors recently in order to try to verify whether any misconduct actually occurred. All jurors voted guilty in March, but now one of them regrets his vote.The one juror reportedly told the judge that he let peer pressure from the other jurors affect his vote and that he felt the right vote was not guilty in the DUI manslaughter case. He claims that he felt from the beginning that all of the other jurors had their minds set on finding the defendant guilty, no matter what the trial presented in favor of the defendant.
These legal challenges have temporarily postponed the sentencing portion of the Florida homicide case, and rightly so. If there is any suspicion that a defendant didn't get a fair trial, it's the responsibility of the system to thoroughly investigate that suspicion and give the defendant another chance at justice should suspicions be confirmed.
We will continue to post updates when there are developments in this case.
Source: Orlando Sentinel, "Juror in Goodman case says he wasn't convinced polo mogul was guilty of DUI-manslaughter," Peter Franceschina, April 30, 2012
]]>Zimmerman is not the only Florida defendant to try to use that law to excuse an act of violence. A woman was arrested for domestic violence in Jacksonville in 2010. She shot a gun near her husband and children during a dispute and was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Her initial attempt to use "stand your ground" didn't work in court.
]]> The judge presiding over the Jacksonville case dismissed the defense's attempt to argue self-defense. A jury later took mere minutes to find the defendant guilty of the three charges of assault. But the defense in this case isn't giving up. A retrial has been requested and, therefore, the woman's sentencing hearing has been postponed. If the retrial is not granted and the convictions remain, the woman could be sentenced to 20 years in prison.She doesn't understand why her claim of self-defense has been rejected by the system when others in similar positions have had success with "stand your ground." The defendant's husband had a history of domestic violence against her. She claims that she fired the gun in the air during the incident after she was physically harmed and threatened by her husband.
The dismissal of the self-defense claim was based on the judge's perception that the defendant had an opportunity to leave the situation before the shot was fired. The defendant says that she had to get her keys before she left, which was when it became necessary to scare her husband off with the shot.
With the questions surrounding this domestic violence case and the Trayvon Martin case, it is clear that "stand your ground" needs to be better clarified. Laws need to be clear in order to be applied in the same way to cases involving similar claims such as self-defense.
Source: CNN, "'Stand your ground' law under scrutiny in domestic violence case," Chuck Hadad, April 24, 2012
]]>The judge who was initially assigned to preside over the second-degree murder case recently gave up her position. For the sake of receiving a fair trial, the defense challenged the appropriateness of the judge selection, arguing that there was a reason why that judge could have been biased and, therefore, unfit to preside over the high-profile case.
]]> According to The Miami Herald, the initial judge's husband worked with a defense attorney who was asked to defend Zimmerman. That attorney turned the job down, but the defense still saw that connection as a dangerous conflict of interest that it wanted to avoid at trial. The judge disqualified herself, and a new judge has been assigned to the trial.Another recent and important turn of events in this Florida homicide trial is that bail was set for Zimmerman. He is now out on $150,000 bail, awaiting the trial that the entire country is waiting to see unfold.
Besides the trial to come, this case has inspired many in the Florida community to challenge the law that Zimmerman relies on to claim self-defense. The Stand Your Ground law was passed in 2005, allowing people in the state to defend themselves with deadly force. The law doesn't just cover a person's right to defend himself in his home; it allows such force in public. The death of Trayvon Martin has made this law a controversial and largely debated one.
Source: The Miami Herald, "New judge takes over Trayvon Martin case," April 19, 2012
]]>Can you imagine how chaotic it would be if arrests, trials and sentencing were governed by emotion? The quest for the truth might be forgotten and overrun by people's desperation to hold someone accountable for alleged crimes. Emotion did play a role, however, in the lenient sentencing of a Florida DUI manslaughter defendant.
]]> Two years ago, a young man drove drunk and caused a DUI accident. He reportedly fled the scene of the crash but was later apprehended, arrested and ultimately charged with DUI manslaughter. The driver of the car he hit was 41 and died from the injuries she sustained in the crash.In Florida, the defendant could have been sentenced to a maximum of 15 years for the homicide conviction. In making a sentencing decision after the guilty plea, the court looked at a couple of things. One, the defendant has no criminal record. Also, the judge felt that the defendant was sincerely remorseful ever since the accident happened.
The defendant, now 20 years old, will serve one year in prison and then 15 years of probation. Though the prosecution is dissatisfied with the outcome, the defendant's criminal defense attorney makes a good point. The whole incident was "tragic," but no sentence could take back that tragedy.
Source: Florida Today, "DUI-manslaughter sentence less than guideline," April 17, 2012
]]>A synthetic drug is a substance that's manufactured to create the same physical side effects as another controlled substance. A popular type of synthetic drug is synthetic marijuana, which has been sold in stores under various names. Local and federal authorities are targeting the distribution of synthetic drugs, and a recent drug arrest in Florida is a sign of the times.
]]> The Sun-Sentinel reports that the DEA has arrested a man in Florida who was allegedly caught distributing fake marijuana to an informant who posed as a storeowner interested in selling the controlled substance in his shop. It's the distributors of synthetic drugs who officials are mostly after at this point, in an effort to keep the manufactured substances out of stores and, therefore, the hands of consumers.The focus on synthetic drugs like fake marijuana and another popular kind called "bath salts" has supposedly intensified due to health matters. Users of the substances have needed emergency medical attention after suffering from serious side effects of the drugs. Critics of the products are especially worried about youth who've had access to the drugs and gotten sick as a result.
Distribution of the newly controlled substances can lead to years in prison. The recent Florida arrest could land that defendant in prison for five years. Possession will also be handled seriously by officials, giving the public more reason to understand drug laws and their rights related to the matter.
Source: Sun-Sentinel, "DEA cracks down on distributors of synthetic marijuana, make first arrest in state," Peter Franceschina, April 15, 2012
]]>Source: The Associated Press, "Prosecutors face hurdles in Trayvon Martin case," Greg Bluestein, April 12, 2012
]]>The family of the 17-year-old who was killed, along with some others in the national public, believe that Florida officials did not properly investigate the homicide. They suspect that the shooter, 28-year-old Andrew Zimmerman, should have been arrested and charged with a crime. But that has not yet happened.
]]> The lack of an arrest or a charge has left many in the public outraged. An announcement made by the special prosecutor involved with the case today might inspire even more fury. Further investigation into the death of the teenager has been underway over the past weeks, the findings of which would generally go before a grand jury in order for it to determine whether charges would be filed against a suspect, Zimmerman in this case.The grand jury was supposed to hear the case tomorrow, April 10, but that isn't going to happen. According to the Orlando Sentinel, the prosecutor has decided not to take the case before the jury as scheduled. More investigation is reportedly planned, but officials insist that this recent decision shouldn't upset anyone too much. It supposedly does not mean that criminal charges will never be filed against Zimmerman.
This story continues to unfold on just about a daily basis. We will post updates as crucial developments are reported.
Source: Orlando Sentinel, "Trayvon Martin: No grand jury in case," Jeff Weiner and Walter Pacheco, April 9, 2012
]]>Even though the defendant was found guilty last month of DUI manslaughter, his conviction has not stopped him and his team from continuing in their fight for justice. No matter who a defendant is, how much money he makes and what he is charged with, he deserves a fair trial. And the defense just does not believe that the trial went in such a way to allow the defendant the ability to defend his name and future from the serious criminal accusation he faced.
]]> Based on the following reasons and more, the defense team has filed an appeal in order to try to get another chance at fighting against the DUI manslaughter charge:The above points are just a few from the 300-page appeal that the defense filed. No appeal has yet been granted, but a response to the filing should come before the sentencing hearing regarding the DUI manslaughter conviction on April 30. We will post an update with new developments in this big Florida criminal case.
Source: The Palm Beach Post, "Polo mogul Goodman's defense files appeal of DUI conviction," Daphne Duret, April 3, 2012
]]>In the Florida defendant's case and the general case of red light camera tickets, the defendants are those who have to fight to prove that the assumption that they are guilty is wrong. They are even expected to provide the physical evidence that the prosecution would normally be expected to collect regarding the charge. The defendant argued that this expectation goes against what's generally accepted within the criminal justice process.
]]> Not only does that shift the burden of providing proof to the defendant, but it puts him in the unconstitutional position of potentially incriminating himself in court. If the defendant does not provide the information requested regarding proving the identity of the driver at the time of the alleged traffic offense, he will be assumed guilty and, therefore, legally required to pay the fine or lose his license.In this Florida man's case, the ticket was sent in the mail 10 days after the supposed offense. Perhaps he couldn't remember who was even driving his vehicle at the time in question.
The defendant's researched arguments worked in his favor. The judge dismissed the charge, agreeing that the Florida statute that led to the traffic ticket is unconstitutional. Because there are many traffic safety advocates who are passionate about the use of red light cameras, this ruling is sure to inspire further debate in Florida.
But at least for now, the defendant from this case has an extra $158 in his bank account that will not go toward paying a fine based on an unjust law.
Sources: State of Florida vs. Thomas C. Filippone
WTAM 1100: "Florida judge rules red light cameras unconstitutional," March 22, 2012
]]>In April 2011, a Florida man was cited for running a red light. His citation was different than a standard ticket because it wasn't issued due to an officer having witnessed the alleged traffic offense. A controversial red light camera caught the defendant supposedly running the red light, leading to him getting his ticket several days later in the mail. He didn't simply pay the ticket and move on. He fought for justice.
]]> Court records indicate that the defendant fought against paying the $158 fine by relying on the rights that are granted to him in the Florida Constitution and the United States Constitution. He pleaded not guilty to failure to comply with a steady red signal and prepared a thorough, constitutional-based argument why the charge and, therefore, the fine should be dismissed.He argued that tickets issued because of red light cameras are unconstitutional, violating his rights for a few reasons. Usually within the criminal justice system, it's the plaintiff who is required to meet the burden of proof and prove the liability of the defendant. That point is just part of his argument. Find out more about the defendant's successful case in the next post.
Sources: State of Florida vs. Thomas C. Filippone
WTAM 1100: "Florida judge rules red light cameras unconstitutional," March 22, 2012
]]>