Criminal Defense Case Results

On August 20, 2025, the Institute for Justice (IJ) and Sammis Law Firm just won an appeal in the 11th Circuit. At the trial level, we took a case in which a man had $8,500 seized by DEA at the Atlanta Airport. Although such cases are usually cost-prohibitive, Jason Sammis took the case because he believes the DEA seizure was particularly unfair and illegal. The Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) wouldn’t give up and forced Jason Sammis to file a motion to suppress and a motion for summary judgment.

Our client was charged with Improper Exhibition of a Firearm. On September 20, 2022, we took this case to jury trial and successfully held the State of Florida to its burden when the jury returned a Not Guilty Verdict in favor of our client.

Our client was charged with a first-degree misdemeanor. We presented mitigation, showing that no crime had occurred. After the prosecutor was unwilling to drop the charges, attorney Katherine Aranda took the case to trial, and the jury returned a not guilty verdict on February 20, 2024.

On 8/13/24, attorneys Katherine Aranda and Joshua Monteiro took a racing case to trial and the jury returned a not guilty verdict in Pinellas County, FL.

The jury returned a “NOT GUILTY” verdict on a first degree felony punishable by life in prison. The charge was pending before the Honorable Susan L. Barthle in Dade City, FL. Instead of facing those penalties, our client was exonerated and walked out of the courthouse with us after the jury returned the not guilty verdict.

The jury returned a “NOT GUILTY” jury verdict in Polk County at the courthouse in Bartow, FL. The defense involved extensive impeachment of the State’s only witness in addition to Justifiable Use of Non-deadly Force and Stand Your Ground in a Felony Battery case.

On January 29, 2019, the government’s motion to dismissed was filed in federal court which terminated the prosecution. Our client was charged a “petty federal theft offense” in federal court. After providing mitigation on the client’s behalf, the Special Assistant United States Attorney filed a “Government’s Motion to Dismiss” the case without prejudice pursuant to Rule 48(a), with leave of the Court. As a result, all charges were dismissed.

On August 29, 2019, the State Attorney’s Office filed a “notice of case status – letter of release” that indicated that “[a]fter completing our investigation, and applying the applicable case law, the State Attorney’s Office has elected not to file criminal charges at this time.” The client was originally arrested for the second-degree felony offense of “carrying a concealed weapon as a convicted felon” at the airport. The client’s family retained us just a few days and the arrest. We requested the surveillance video from the incident from the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority. We also provided extensive information to the State Attorney’s Office showing all of the reasons why our client didn’t know that a weapon was located in his carry on luggage. So that the State Attorney’s Office could complete a more thorough pre-file investigation, we filed a written waiver of speedy trial. Ultimately, the State decided not to file any charges after taking more than 10 weeks to make a filing decision.

On June 27, 2019, the State Attorney’s Office filed a notice of nolle prosequi which dropped all charges against our client. Our client was originally arrested on March 3, 3029, for a felony for burglary of an unoccupied structure and a misdemeanor for petit theft first degree. We were able to present information to the prosecutor showing the reasons why our client was innocent of the charges.

Sexual Battery Allegations and Investigation – In December of 2022, a search warrant was executed on our client’s property due to false allegations of sexual battery. After nearly a year of fighting the charges, we convinced the State Attorney not to file any charges and close the investigation.

on September 24, 2020, the State Attorney’s Office in Pasco County, FL, filed a “nolle prosequi” form which dropped the felony charge of “obtaining property in return for a worthless check” from 1997. Our client, who lived out of state, hired us after discovering an old felony warrant. After we were hired, we contact the prosecutor to request that the prosecutor drop the charges. The basis for the nolle prosequi was that “further investigation of this case by the State Attorney’s Office has revealed that further prosecution is not warranted.” Our client was not required to surrender on the warrant.

On June 24, 2024, the State Attorney’s Office filed a “no information” after deciding that the facts and circumstances of the case did not warrant prosecution for fleeing or attempting to elude involving high speed or wanton disregard. Part of the reason for that decision was that an attorney at Sammis Law Firm presented the SAO with favorable or mitigating information showing no crime had occurred. 

Our client was wrongfully charged after a rushed investigation into fraud. Our client fell victim to an Instagram Love Scam where another individual had access to her mobile banking and fraudulently deposited checks into her account. The officers involved failed to follow up with the bank to discuss the fact that our client had provided this information to them. Based on the officers’ rushed investigation, our client was charged with three felonies. Fortunately, our client saved all of our IG messages with the scammer and we were able to provide those to the State. Despite this evidence, the State initially demanded that our client pay over $7,000.00 in restitution and take a deal for a diversion program. Instead, we rejected that offer, pressed on with setting depositions, and discovered missing notes from the bank not provided in discovery. In addition, the officer admitted to never following up when he was aware there was potential exculpatory evidence. Subsequent to the depositions, the State did the right thing and filed a written Nolle Prosse dropping all charges on July 22, 2021, in Case No.: 20-CF-XXX605 in front of Judge Marlewski instead of going to trial.

On July 8, 2022, our client was charged with Resisting with Violence, Depriving an Officer of Means of Communication, and Possession of Marijuana following a traffic stop in Pinellas County. Our client was facing mandatory prison time, which was the State’s only offer. When our client hired us in November 2022, the police department had still not turned over any body worn camera footage of the traffic stop. This footage was pivotal to our client’s defense that he was profiled, manhandled, and wrongfully arrested by police. Our office made multiple demands to the State Attorney’s office and the police department for the video. We also conducted depositions of several officers on scene, all of whom claimed their footage had mysteriously been deleted or misplaced. In response, our attorney filed several motions including a Motion to Suppress and Motion to Dismiss. Upon seeing what motions were filed, the Honorable Judge Andrews urged the State Attorney to critically review the issues in the case. The State Attorney then offered to potentially reduce our client’s charges to misdemeanors for time served. Our client trusted our expertise and advice and rejected the State’s proposal electing to proceed with a hearing on the motions. Prior to the motion hearings, the State announced a Nolle Prosse, which dismissed all charges against our client.

Motion for Early Termination of Probation Granted in Pinellas County – Our client was placed on Youthful Offender Probation for three years. She completed all the special conditions of her probation within 18 months. The Honorable Judge, Joseph Bulone of Pinellas County, granted our Motion to Early Terminate on January 20, 2023, terminating her probation 18 months early.

Our client was originally arrested on a charge of Aggravated Battery (Pregnant Female). The client hired us right after arrest but before any charges were formally filed by the State Attorney’s Office. We contacted the State Attorney’s intake division to provide mitigation and additional information about the case. Following receipt of that information, the State decided on December 20, 2023, not to file any formal charges against our client. This allowed our client to maintain his clean record and move forward with his life.

On September 20, 2019, $181,500.00 in U.S. Currency was seized at the Tampa International Airport before a domestic flight. A federal agent wrote a receipt to our client that said: “MONEY CONTAINED IN 2 BAGS. ESTIMATED VALUE IS 181,500.00.” However, only $159,950 was deposited into the bank after the seizure.

After not reaching a resolution with the Assistant United States Attorney for the timely return of the funds, we file a lawsuit against CBP in federal court on January 31, 2020. We agree to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit against CBP after it returned $159,950 and agreed to return an additional amount for interest in a second check.

On June 19, 2019, the State Attorney’s Office filed a “NO INFORMATION” which provided that “having taken testimony under oath at the State Attorney investigation, concludes that the facts and circumstances revealed do not warrant prosecution at this time.” As a result, no charges were ever filed and the case was closed. The case involved an arrest for fleeing and eluding a law enforcement officer (LEO) with the St. Petersburg Police Department in Pinellas County. This offense of Fleeing and Eluding a LEO under Florida Statute Section 316.1935(2), is a third-degree felony. The criminal report affidavit alleged that the officer initiated a traffic stop at the intersection of 38th Avenue and 16th street on a vehicle using lights and siren before the vehicle fled from the scene. The officer described the make and model of the vehicle, the tag number, and a description of the driver. According to the report, the driver was later identified by detectives. We were able to request a surveillance video from a business in the area where the incident occurred to show that the events could not have occurred in the way alleged by the officer. We also requested CAD calls, dispatch records, GPS records, dash camera recordings, and evidence of any driver’s license or tag check performed by the officer from the St. Petersburg Police Department so that the timeline could be better established. As a result, the prosecutor filed a “no information.” A “no information” indicates the prosecutor is formally ending the criminal investigation of the case with no intention of filing a charging document in the future.

On August 19, 2020, the prosecutor in Tampa, FL, filed a “Notice of Case Statute – Letter of Release” which indicated “no-filed” as the filing. The reason listed was that the “victim has recanted the original facts given to law enforcement or has given statements that are inconsistent or not credible. There is no other admissible evidence to support the charge.” As a result, the arrest warrant was recalled and our client did NOT have to go into custody for the outstanding arrest warrant issued on July 27, 2020, for aggravated battery on a pregnant female or great bodily harm under Section 784.045(1)(b). Shortly after the incident, we were able to meet with the alleged victim who provided us with a “drop affidavit” requesting that the case not be prosecuted. We provided the drop affidavit to the prosecutor along with information from additional witnesses showing that our client was not guilty of the accusation.

In a hard-fought battle, our firm ultimately won an extensive hearing on a sexual violence injunction in front of Judge Perrone in Division G in Hillsborough County. In 18-DR-29XX, the opposing counsel continued to drag out this matter in hopes of our client agreeing to the injunction in some form within the divorce proceedings. We refused to settle, and the court had a full hearing with witnesses and evidence on July 19, 2018. We had extensive evidence to show that the allegations were not true based on a severely delayed reporting and failure to cooperate with law enforcement. The court dismissed the injunction finding there was no competent substantial evidence to award an injunction.

Our client hired us for two separate Battery charges. We set both for Non-Jury Trial in front of Judge Taylor in Hillsborough County. By not backing down, we successfully had both cases dropped, 20-CM-XX76 on July 14, 2021, and 20-CM-XX92 on August 17, 2021.

On August 17, 2023, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the misdemeanor crime of leaving the scene of a traffic crash, a second degree misdemeanor, to a civil infraction for failing to report under Section 316.062. As part of a negotiated plea, The Honorable Joseph Lawhorne agreed to “withhold adjudication” and imposed $166 in court costs.

Our client’s employee was arrested while operating a work vehicle, which was subsequently seized by the Sheriff’s Office under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. We demanded an adversarial preliminary hearing to determine if probable cause existed for the seizure and provided proof that the vehicle was owned by our client. Following receipt of our demand and evidence, the Sheriff’s Office decided to release the vehicle, returning it to our client.

Our client contacted us after learning that she had an active violation of probation warrant in Hillsborough County, FL. The underlying charges were two counts of Robbery with a Firearm or Deadly Weapon and one count of Attempted Robbery with a Firearm or Deadly Weapon. We filed a motion to withdraw the violation of probation warrant so that our client could avoid having to sit in jail pending a resolution of her case. On November 14, 2023, The Honorable Nick Nazaretian, Circuit Court Judge in Division K, considered mitigation presented to the court regarding the alleged violation and the progress our client made on probation. The court dismissed the violation entirely. This allowed our client to avoid a mandatory minimum 9-year prison sentence and maximum possible penalty of life in prison.

Felony Conviction and Prison Avoided on a Violation of Probation – On April 12, 2023, a violation of probation hearing was held in Hillsborough County in front of the Honorable Judge Nazaretian. Our client was alleged to have violated several conditions of his probation and was facing a minimum of 21 months in prison and a maximum of 70 years for all of his combined charges. Our attorney was able to convince Judge Nazaretian to not sentence our client to any prison time and to allow our client to keep his withhold of adjudication on all of his charges. This allowed our client to avoid becoming a convicted felon on 9 different felony charges. Judge Nazaretian sentenced our client to complete a drug program while in custody and terminated his probation so that he had no further probation obligations upon his release.

On June 17, 2025, the Honorable J. Layne Smith, Circuit Judge in Wakulla County, FL, ordered the sheriff’s office to return the seized cryptocurrency, including over $500,000 worth of Bitcoin (BTC), to our client. Shortly after the cryptocurrency was seized and our law firm was retained, we filed a demand for an adversarial preliminary hearing (APH) on the Florida Attorney General’s Office as required by the notice of seizure. An all-day adversarial preliminary hearing was held on June 11, 2025. After the hearing, the Court entered an order finding:

At the beginning of the adversarial preliminary hearing, Ms. Sammis handed the Court a copy of the claimant’s motion to dismiss and memorandum of law that she had filed that morning. The Court reviewed the motion prior to the start of the evidentiary hearing. The Court took the motion under advisement and proceeded with an all-day adversarial preliminary hearing.

[The Court found that because the cryptocurrency account was never located in Wakulla County, FL,] per Florida Statute Section 30.15(1), the sheriff’s office lacked the authority to seize property in another county….Wherefore, the Court dismisses this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court orders the petitioner to return the seized account to the claimant.

We were retained on August 8, 2025, to represent clients with a Binance account worth over $2,170,000 in USDT. The clients retained us after 33 months of requesting information from Binance.com customer service about why their account was frozen only to be repeatedly told the “account under internal review” or “completion expected soon.” After determining the account was frozen at the request of the FBI, we filed a verified claim demanding court action which was signed by our clients. We were then contacted by a DEA Special Agent and the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) assigned to the case. Based on the FBI’s concerns, we helped our clients provide records showing how the transactions occurred, and why they had no knowledge that some small portion of the funds could allegedly be traced to a vast money laundering enterprise. The AUSA indicated they would normally seize the funds, start the forfeiture process, and provide my clients with direct notice of the seizure. Based on the information provided, however, the government decided not to take that action because our clients had explained, in detail, that they were unwittingly involved. The information provided was helpful to the federal investigation and suggested our clients made trades without properly vetting the source of the funds and/or the trade counterparty, but had no criminal intent. For those reasons, on September 10, 2025, the FBI and AUSA decided to withdraw the FBI’s freeze request. Within 2 business days, the account was unfrozen. 

On August 9, 2019, the State Attorney’s Office in Hernando County filed a “nolle prosequi” which dropped the charge of possession of cannabis – 20 grams or less. The nolle prosequi listed the reason as “case does not warrant prosecution.” By way of background, the client hired us after another attorney set the case for a plea deal involving adjudication of guilt, 12 months probation, a $500 fine plus court costs, 60 days in jail, and a mandatory driver’s license suspension. Part of the reason for the harsh plea deal was because the client had several prior marijuana convictions including a sentence of 364 days in jail for a felony charge of selling marijuana. After we took over the case, we canceled the plea and filed a motion to suppress based on a bad stop and illegal search. We also ordered the officer’s DAVID records to see if the inquiries matched the officer’s claims in the police report. We also scheduled a time to view and photograph the evidence in the evidence room in the jail. Shortly thereafter, the state attorney’s office filed the nolle prosequi which terminated the prosecution.

After a long battle with the State Attorneys Office and extensive mitigation in 19-CMXXXX05, we were successful in achieving a Nolle Prosse on January 9, 2020, ensuring our client’s record and reputation remained clear. We provided extensive documentation to show our client was indeed a licensed contractor in a county other than Hillsborough and had a stellar reputation in the area. Despite the fact that he was not licensed in Hillsborough, he had a license in a neighboring county. We sent numerous letters to the State and were rejected each time in our quest for a Nolle Prosse. Finally, after our fourth attempt, and four months later, we got the result we were hoping for. Rather than caving and accepting a diversion program, our client’s case was dropped outright on the merits.

On July 9, 2021, the State Attorney’s Office in New Port Richey, Pasco County, was forced to drop a Battery charge against our client in 20-MM-XXXX03AXWS after the case was set for a jury trial. The State was insistent that they would not drop the case despite the alleged victim not wanting to prosecute. While our client was fearful that the State may elect to pursue the charges, we would not stand down and take the State’s offer of probation and a conviction. At the Calendar Call in front of Judge Poblick, State and Defense announced ready for trial. Prior to the scheduled Jury Trial, the State filed a written Nolle Prosse dropping the charge against our client.

On August 9, 2023, the State Attorney’s Office in Pinellas County agreed not to file any formal charges against our client after we presented mitigation and explained defenses that existed in the case that would make a successful prosecution difficult. Our client was arrested for Battery of a Person 65 or Older, Resisting an Officer without Violence, and Disorderly Intoxication.

Our client was charged with Grand Theft x2, Criminal Use of Personal Identification x2, Unlawful Filing of False Documents Against Real or Personal Property, and Operating as a Broker or Sales Associate without a Without a License in Polk County. The charges were from 2017. We filed a Motion to Dismiss the charges based on the Statute of Limitations timeframe being expired. The Judge agreed and granted our motion on January 6, 2023, and all charges were dismissed against our client.

Our client was initially arrested for Domestic Violence Battery on January 4, 2024, in Pinellas County. Attorney Idalis Vento contacted the State Attorney’s Office prior to charges being filed. The alleged victim was cooperative in not wanting charges to be filed and signed a notarized “Drop Affidavit” saying as much. Ms. Vento filed the Drop Affidavit and presented other mitigating information to the State. The State elected not to file charges against the client on February 6, 2024, filing a “No Information.”

Our client initially sought a hardship license. Upon reviewing his driving record and working with the DMV, we found grounds for full restoration of his original license rather than issuing a hardship. Our client was able to resume normal driving privileges without limitations.

An attorney with a law enforcement agency in Pasco County filed a Risk Protection Order against our client in an attempt to remove any firearms from her possession for a period of one year. Our client was evaluated by a specialized doctor in this area who determined she was of no risk to herself or anyone else. We provided that evidence to the agency attorney along with other information. On August 4, 2022, we successfully convinced the agency’s attorney to drop the Risk Protection Order allowing our client to regain her 2nd Amendment rights.

On June 3, 2019, the State Attorney’s Office in Hillsborough County, FL, filed a “Notice of Nolle Prosequi” which dropped the charge of leaving the scene of a crash without rendering aid with injury in violation of Section 316.027(2)(a). In that case, we were able to present mitigation showing that our client was not at fault in the crash and did not knowingly leave the scene without rendering aid. After the criminal charges were dropped, we went to traffic court on the outstanding “careless driving” charge. That civil infraction was also dismissed on August 20, 2019, when a critical witness failed to appear in court. No other civil or criminal charges arose from the incident so the client was completely exonerated.

Our client was accused of violating a Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission rule, specifically as it relates to fishing. We successfully had his case in 21-CM-XXXX40 dropped in front of Judge Gutman on August 3, 2021.

Our client was accused of having a controlled substance in his pocket and entering the jail with that pill. He initially was facing two separate felonies. Our client was adamant he was borrowing the shorts from a friend, and was unaware the pill was inside. We obtained a sworn affidavit from an independent witness who advised the shorts were lent to our client, and had a loose pill from prescription medication inside. This affidavit along with the prescription was provided to the State. The State filed a written No File on August 2, 2021, in 21-CF-XXXX06, thereby preventing our client from having to enter the criminal courts’ system at all.

Our client was formally charged with Battery by Strangulation under Fla. Stat. 784.041 in a case pending before Pinellas County Judge Meyer. We conducted discovery depositions and elicited testimony from the alleged victim, showing that our client did not strangle her. We then filed a Motion to Dismiss the charge based on the alleged victim’s testimony and the State’s inability to prove the charge. We presented the State with mitigation from our client and information surrounding the alleged victim’s statements, which called into question the credibility of witness testimony. Before the Motion to Dismiss being heard by the Judge, the State filed a Nolle Prosse of the case on October 2, 2024, officially dropping the charge against our client.Our client was formally charged with Battery by Strangulation under Fla. Stat. 784.041 in a case pending before Pinellas County Judge Meyer. We conducted discovery depositions and elicited testimony from the alleged victim, showing that our client did not strangle her. We then filed a Motion to Dismiss the charge based on the alleged victim’s testimony and the State’s inability to prove the charge. We presented the State with mitigation from our client and information surrounding the alleged victim’s statements, which called into question the credibility of witness testimony. Before the Motion to Dismiss being heard by the Judge, the State filed a Nolle Prosse of the case on October 2, 2024, officially dropping the charge against our client.

On May 21, 2021, the Assistant State Attorney in Hernando County, FL, filed a “nolle prosequi” that terminated the prosecution for DUI manslaughter, the only charge pending against our client. The case involved a two-vehicle crash with a fatality that occurred in October of 2018. The charge was dropped the week before we scheduled a motion hearing to suppress the following evidence:

• our client’s medical records which were improperly obtained by the State Attorney’s Office; 
• vials of medical blood seized from the hospital after the execution of a search warrant; and
• the FDLE blood test results showing a BAC over the legal limit.

Our motion alleged that the State Attorney’s Office improperly obtained our client’s medical records without any legal authority and prior to providing notice and the opportunity to object. After obtaining our client’s medical records but before disclosing that fact, the State Attorney’s Office did provide notice of intent to subpoena the medical records.

We entered a timely objection that triggered a Hunter hearing. On November 14, 2018, a hearing was held pursuant to Hunter v. State, 639 So.2d 74 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) on the State’s Motion for Authorization to Execute the subpoena for the medical records. After hearing arguments from the Assistant State Attorney and the defense, the State’s motion was denied. Despite losing the Hunter hearing, the State Attorney’s Office later provided us with a copy of our client’s medical records in discovery.

Our motion also moved to suppress vials of medical blood seized with a search warrant that contained material misrepresentations and intentionally left out material facts. Our motion for a Franks hearing also alleged a failure to follow proper procedures for the chain of custody and storage of the blood. Instead of going forward with the motion hearing, the Assistant State Attorney entered a “nolle prosequi” right before the motion hearing was scheduled to begin.

Our client was charged with Driving While License Suspended in Hillsborough County. Prior to the first court date, our office provided the State Attorney with information to show that our client’s license was expired, not suspended and that he currently held a valid license. The State announced a Nolle Prosse of the charge at the first court date, which dismissed the charge.

Our 16-year-old client was initially charged in juvenile court in Hillsborough County with Robbery and Resisting an Officer without Violence. The State later decided to upgrade the charges to adult felony court. Even though our client had no prior record, the State Attorney wanted him to plea to adult felony charges and to complete adult felony probation. After depositions were completed, our office filed a Motion to Exclude the eyewitness’s testimony identifying our client. On the day of the motion hearing, the State presented no evidence to contest our motion, and the Judge dismissed the Robbery charge. After hearing an argument from our attorney regarding the Resisting charge, the Judge dismissed that charge as well.

Our client contacted the firm when she was wrongfully arrested and accused of Grand Theft Motor Vehicle. Our attorney contacted the intake attorney at the State Attorney’s office to provide additional information not contained in the initial police report. We showed the State Attorney evidence that our client held a valid lease for the vehicle at issue at the time of the alleged theft and that this was no more than a disgruntled former employer trying to get our client in trouble. After reviewing the information provided by our office, the State Attorney elected not to file formal charges against our client.

Our client was charged in Hillsborough County with a first DUI with property damage and was not permitted to take part in a diversion program because of the property damage enhancement. We filed a Motion to Suppress challenging our client’s detention and arrest and asked the State to consider reducing the DUI charge to a Reckless Driving charge. The State declined the reduction and only offered our client to plea to the DUI as charged. Days before the hearing on our Motion to Suppress, the State offered our client a reduction to Reckless Driving with no probation or sanctions.

December 31, 2009 – Citation 6341SNX – Jefferson County Traffic Court, Monticello, FL. The court granted our motion to vacate or set aside a prior conviction which caused our client to be declared a habitual traffic offender. The court then accepted a new plea, ordered our client to take an 8 hour driver improvement class and agreed to withhold adjudication which allowed our client to obtain a valid Florida driver’s license.

On September 20, 2019, $181,500.00 in U.S. Currency was seized at the Tampa International Airport before a domestic flight. A federal agent wrote a receipt to our client that said: “MONEY CONTAINED IN 2 BAGS. ESTIMATED VALUE IS 181,500.00.” However, only $159,950 was deposited into the bank after the seizure.

On September 26, 2019, we sent a claim via Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Fines, Penalties, & Forfeitures Officer, with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection in Tampa, FL., for the $181,500.00 in U.S. Currency.

Without acknowledging the claim, on October 9, 2019, Robert Del Toro, Fines, Penalties, & Forfeitures Officer with CBP send a notice of seizure claiming that only $159,950 has been seized. We filed a verified second claim for the funds listed in the “notice of seizure.”

After not reaching a resolution with the Assistant United States Attorney for the timely return of the funds, we file a lawsuit against CBP in federal court on January 31, 2020. We agree to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit against CBP after it returned $159,950 and agreed to return an additional amount for interest in a second check.

On January 31, 2022, the Court entered an order denying HCSO’s petition for a Risk Protection Oder on the day of the scheduled final hearing. In this case, the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) actually agreed to dismiss the petition after our client submitted to a private risk assessment finding that he was not dangerous. We also argued that many of the facts alleged in the petition by his ex-wife were false or greatly exaggerated.

Our client was accused of fraudulently obtaining a Commercial Drivers License (CDL). After his suspension was upheld at the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (FDHSMV) Show Cause Hearing, we filed a Writ of Certiorari challenging the suspension of his license. The Writ was based on DHSMV lacking competent and substantial evidence that our client obtained a driver’s license by fraud. In response, the DHSMV agreed to set the fraud suspension on our client’s driver record aside on May 31, 2022.

On October 31, 2024, the Honorable Aaron W. Hubbard, County Judge in Pinellas County, dismissed an injunction for protection from domestic violence after the petitioner presented testimony about alleged wrongdoing by her estranged husband. We questioned the petitioner in order to show the lack of evidence and inconsistencies in her testimony. The court dismissed the injunction finding that the evidence presented was insufficient to allow the court to issue an injunction for protection.

On December 30, 2024, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer invalidated an administrative suspension because there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension since the “DUI evidentiary packet was not received” from the Tampa Police Department in time.

On January 30, 2023, after hearing testimony from our Mental Health Expert, the Sherriff’s Office Attorney agreed we had established substantial evidence that our client did not pose a significant danger to themselves or others by possessing a firearm. The Final Risk Protection Order was dismissed.

Court Grants Motion to Suppress Evidence of Refusal after Recantation

For a case pending in Hillsborough County, on November 29, 2021, the Court granted our motion to suppress evidence of an alleged refusal to submit to a breath test after hearing testimony from the arresting officer. The arresting officer testified that our client was arrested for BUI. Shortly after the arrest, our client was escorted into the FWC administrative building adjacent to the Gandy boat ramp. Once inside and seated, Defendant said that he would take the breath test and unequivocally recanted the alleged refusal, but the arresting officer told him he already refused and it was too late. We argued that when our client agreed to take the breath test he had been in the continual custody of the arresting officer and was under observation for the entire time. Honoring such a request would not have resulted in any substantial inconvenience or expense to law enforcement. The testing equipment and personnel were still available. The subsequent test would still have been accurate since such a short time had passed since the arrest. As a result, the Court granted our motion to suppress any mention of the request for a breath test, the reading of implied consent, or the alleged refusal.

Third DUI Dropped to Reckless Driving with No Probation – On June 29, 2022, a DUI case pending in New Port Richey in Pasco County, FL, was resolved with a plea to reckless driving under Section 316.192 with a withhold of adjudication with no probation. Because of the withhold of adjudication, our client received no points on his driver’s license.

Our client was originally arrested for a second refusal to submit to breath testing and reckless driving. The arresting officer entered the wrong person’s name on most of the paperwork (although he had our client’s driver’s license which correctly listed his name). As a result, the DHSMV hearing officer was forced to invalidate the one year administrative suspension for the alleged refusal at the formal review hearing.

In the criminal case, we filed a motion to suppress evidence because of a prolonged detention which resulted in some of the state’s evidence being suppressed, including the alleged refusal. The stop officer, Deputy Christopher Ramos, was on leave when the case was last set for trial. Because of all of these problems, the State Attorney’s Office on June 29, 2022, offered to reduce the case to reckless driving under Section 316.192 with a withhold of adjudication and no probation.

The prosecutor had threatened to charge the DUI as a felony because of two (2) prior DUI convictions but had problems obtaining the underlying out-of-state records.

Second DUI Dropped to Reckless Driving – On June 29, 2022, for a DUI case pending at the courthouse in Tampa, FL, in case number 21-CT-0036XX, the court accepted negotiated plea for a second DUI that was reduced to reckless driving with an adjudication of guilt and a requirement to pay court costs. No probation was required. The police reports alleged that our client had a breath test reading of .122 and .131.

BUI Amended to Reckless Boating with a Withhold – In another case resolved on June 29, 2022, our client was charged with boating under the influence (BUI) and a civil infraction with a $500 penalty for refusing to submit to breath testing after the BUI arrest in case number 21-CM-0078xx. Although our client had a prior DUI that had been reduced to reckless, the State agreed to reduce the BUI to reckless boating with a withhold of adjudication and 12 months probation to complete the standard sanctions with automatic early termination of probation when all of the special conditions were satisfied. The civil infraction for refusal was dismissed by the court.

Our client had never been in trouble before and was accused of leaving the scene of an accident. We were able to achieve a Nolle Prosse in 21-CT-XXXX05 in front of Judge Conrad on July 29, 2021, and avoid a criminal record.

The Sheriff’s Office filed a Risk Protection Order (RPO) against our client. After having our client undergo a risk assessment by a doctor, who determined he posed no threat, we presented this evidence at the hearing. The court found insufficient evidence to grant the RPO, dismissing it in favor of our client.

January 28, 2009 – State v. S.J. – Motion to set aside conviction for driving while license suspended with knowledge, a misdemeanor offense, citation number 2616ZFYR, was granted in Hillsborough County by the Honorable Elizabeth G. Rice. Our client was able to get her driver’s license back after the HTO revocation was lifted by the DMV.

April 28, 2009 – State v. S.R. – Motion granted to vacate the conviction for driving while license suspended in Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL, for citation number 3422GCQ, which will cause the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles in Tallahassee to lift the Florida habitual traffic offender suspension.

Felony Marijuana Charges No-Filed

August 28, 2018 – Our client was arrested for the following charges:

• possession of cannabis more than 20 grams, a third degree felony;
• possession of cannabis sativa resin, a third degree felony; and
• possession of drug paraphernalia, a first degree misdemeanor.

The case involved a problematic stop, detention and arrest by an officer with the Tampa Police Department. After the arrest, we immediately send a letter to the intake prosecutor at the State Attorney’s Office asking them not to file the case and explained the problems. Less than two weeks later, on August 28, 2018, the State Attorney’s Office filed a Notice of Case Status – Letter of Release that documented the case filing decision of “NO-FILED”. The notice stated: [a]fter completing our investigation, carefully reviewing the facts, and applying the applicable law the State Attorney’s Office has elected not to file criminal charges at this time.”

On April 28, 2020, the HSMV Field Hearing Officers at the Bureau of Administrative Review in Clearwater set aside the six month suspension of driving privileges for driving with an unlawful alcohol level. The order found that after reviewing the facts of the case, the Hearing Officer determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear. 

On October 28, 2022, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer in Tampa, FL, invalidated a suspension for driving with an unlawful alcohol level after a DUI arrest by an officer with the University of South Florida Police Department. The suspension was invalidated because there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension since the DUI evidentiary packet was not received by the DHSMV in time for the hearing.

On April 28, 2023, the Honorable Mary Catherine Green, County Judge in Lakeland, FL, granted a motion to exclude our client’s breath test. After our client blew into the machine, the results were .112 and .109 g/210L. The breath test machine, called the Intoxilyzer 8000, had the serial number 80-005810. At the motion hearing, we questioned the agency inspector, employed by the Lakeland Police Department, and the department inspector, employed by FDLE. The court concluded:

“the July 9, 2021 agency inspection, which was required before the instrument could be returned to evidentiary use, was not conducted in substantial compliance with 11D-8, FAC, and therefore could not provide sufficient reliability that the instrument met the requirements of FAC to be placed into evidentiary use. Breath results are admissible into evidence only upon compliance with the statutory provisions and administrative rules of the Implied Consent law…. Subsequent monthly agency inspections do not cure the lack of substantial compliance. It is therefore,

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Motion to Suppress or Exclude Breath Test Results for Lack of Substantial Compliance is GRANTED.

2. Defendant’s breath test results are excluded as evidence in this cause.”

This ruling means that all breath tests from July 9, 2021, until the machine was finally pulled out of rotation in April of 2022, should have been excluded from evidence if this issue had been raised.

On May 28, 2025, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer with the Bureau of Administrative Reviews (BAR) office in Tampa, FL, issue a Final Order invalidating the 6 month administrative suspension because “the DUI evidentiary packet was not received” from the New Port Richey Police Department in time for the formal review hearing. As a result, the administrative suspension was lifted, instantly restoring the client’s full driving privileges.

Our client’s concealed carry permit was denied due to previous charges. We obtained certified copies of his convictions and submitted correspondence to the Department of Agriculture, clarifying the nature of his record. As a result, the client was issued his permit.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari Granted and Suspension Quashed

On October 27, 2020, the Chief Judge in Polk County, FL, The Honorable Ellen S. Masters, issued an order granting our petition for writ of certiorari and quashing the administrative suspension. We filed the writ after the hearing officer improperly denied our request to invalidate an administrative suspension.

In this case, the hearing officer inadvertently set the hearing for October 20 instead of November 20. After realizing the mistake, the hearing officer failed to correct the mistake within the 30 day deadline. After the 30 days passed with no hearing being properly scheduled, we filed a motion to invalidate. Instead of just invalidating the suspension as required by statute, the hearing officer continued the hearing and then ruled on the merits after several witnesses testified.

After the hearing officer upheld the suspension, we filed a Motion for Reconsideration and Demand for Attorney Fees and Costs on February 14, 2020, pursuant to Section 57.105, Florida Statutes. We then filed the “petition for writ of certiorari” which was ultimately granted.

On appeal, the Court noted that the DHSMV was wrong when it alleged the issue was not preserved for review and found the DHSMV’s arguments to be “insincere.” The Court also admonished the DHSMV when it wrote:

“…the Hearing Officer determined that Petitioner’s attorney should not raise an objection to the scheduling error when the Department has previously afforded the benefit of a continuance or temporary driving permit to the attorney’s other clients. That is not the standard outlined by Florida Statutes. Similarly, the Court is not persuaded by the Department’s suggestion that professional civility required the Petitioner’s attorney to “pick up the phone” or otherwise alert the Department to correct the error even if such action is contrary to the best interest of the attorney’s client.”

12 Month Refusal Suspension Invalidated for DUI in Hernando County – 

On July 27, 2022, the Hearing Officer at the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Reviews (BAR) office issued a final order setting aside the administrative license suspension. In this case, the client was arrested for DUI in Hernando County by officers with the Florida Highway Patrol.

The order provided:

“Upon a review of the case, there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because there is a lack of competent substantial evidence to support that the petition was driving or in actual physical control of the vehicle. While law enforcement arrived to the scene of a traffic crash and reflected in their report that they ‘made contact with the driver of the red Jeep,’ there was insufficient evidence to indicate how the petitioner was identified to be the driver.”

On June 27, 2019, the State Attorney’s Office in Tampa, FL, filed a “Notice of Termination of Prosecution” with the clerk of the court which provided: “Having reviewed the charge(s) contained in the Criminal Report Affidavit and/or Notice to Appear, the State Attorney’s Office informs you that the charge(s) contained therein is/are dismissed and prosecution is terminated as of this date and that the defendant need not appear for any further proceedings in this matter. This notice is also authority to inform the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office to release the bond, if bond has been posted.” In this case, we presented information to the State Attorney’s Office showing why the charge for domestic violence battery should be dismissed immediately.

Driving Under the Influence Violation of Probation Affidavit Dismissed. Our client’s probation officer violated his probation after he failed to complete his community Service Hours, his DUI School, and treatment. We had our client complete all of his requirements before his court hearing. On March 27, 2023, Honorable Judge Jeffery Rich of Hillsborough County dismissed the Violation of Probation Affidavit and terminated our client’s probation.

Petitions for Injunctions for Protection Against Stalking Dismissed After Evidentiary Hearing with Two Respondents

On October 26, 2017, in 17-DR-015XXX and 17-DR-015XXX, an injunction hearing was heard before the Honorable Judge Frances Perrone in Hillsborough County.  After taking an extensive deposition of the Petitioner, we were able to get the evidence we needed to defeat an injunction against one client in a Motion for Directed Verdict. As to the second client, Judge Perrone dismissed the Injunction against him after hearing testimony from the Respondent that showed there was not competent substantial evidence of stalking.

Judge Suppresses Blood Test Seized in DUI Manslaughter / Vehicular Homicide Case – On June 26, 2023, the Honorable Chris Helinger, Circuit Court Judge in Pinellas County, FL, granted our motion to suppress a blood draw in a DUI Manslaughter and Vehicular Homicide case. We argued that officers with Largo Police Department illegally ordered the seizure of blood from our client without a warrant, consent, or exigent circumstances in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. We also argued our client never authorized the testing of his blood or waived patient record confidentiality with respect to the testing of his blood for its alcohol or drug content in violation of our client’s constitutional right to privacy contained in Article I, Section 23 of the Florida Constitution and Fla. Stat. Section 395.3025. The motion was heard on June 19, 2023, and several officers with the Largo Police Department testified, as well as the EMT who drew the blood and Jenna Chin, a toxicologist with the Pinellas County Crime Lab. The same day the court made its ruling granting our motion, the Assistant State Attorney filed a NOTICE OF APPEAL that the State was appealing the interlocutory order suppressing evidence obtained by search and seizure before trial. The appeal is currently pending in the Second District Court of Appeal.

On June 26, 2025, the HSMV Hearing Officer at the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Reviews entered an order finding insufficient evidence to support the administrative suspension because the arresting officer and breath test officer failed to appear.

Domestic Violence Battery Dropped in Tampa, Florida

August 2, 2018 – Our client’s DV Battery case was dropped on July 25, 2018, after we pushed the case to Jury Trial. Based on the State’s refusal to drop the case earlier and offer of probation, we elected to schedule a trial. On the date of Pretrial in front of the Honorable Margaret Taylor in Division E, the State dropped 18-CM-001XXX.

12 Month Refusal Suspension Set Aside at Tampa BAR

On September 25, 2020, the hearing officer set aside a 12 month suspension for a second refusal after a DUI arrest by an officer with the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office. In this case, we did not subpoena any witnesses because the information in the packet was insufficient, on its face, to support the suspension. At the hearing, we made several objections to show all the problems. The hearing officer issued an order that invalidated the suspension after determining that “there is insufficient evidence to suppose the suspension because of conflicting evidence or discrepancies.”

Our client was charged with grand theft and dealing in stolen property stemming from allegations made several years earlier by a former landlord in Florida. At the time the charges were filed, our client had already moved to another state and was unaware that a warrant had been issued. Upon learning of the charges, she retained our firm to defend her. Although the State initially offered probation with classes and conditions, we conducted a deposition of the alleged victim and uncovered credibility issues that cast serious doubt on the prosecution’s case. Following negotiations, the State offered pretrial intervention, but our client—maintaining her innocence—declined. Ultimately, after setting the case for trial, we reached a resolution where our client agreed to pay restitution in exchange for dismissal of all charges. The case was formally dismissed in April 2025.

Assigned Attorney: Josh Monteiro

Our client was charged with Boating Under the Influence, under Fla. Stat. Section 327.35 in Hillsborough County. We filed a Motion to Suppress based on no reasonable suspicion for a BUI investigation and no probable cause for a BUI arrest. The motion proceeded to a full hearing before Judge Conrad where the arresting officer testified, as well as our client. After considering the evidence presented and the argument from our attorney, Judge Conrad ruled in our favor and agreed that there was no probable cause to arrest our client for BUI. Our attorney then orally moved to dismiss the entire case based on ruling that excluded all evidence in the case. Judge Conrad again agreed and granted the Motion to Dismiss. Our client successfully avoided any criminal charges or BUI sanctions on January 25, 2024.

U.S. Currency was seized from our client at the Tampa International Airport. The receipt provided to the client by Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”) Special Agent (“SA”) Carlos Carrasquillo indicated that “$13,227” had been seized and the currency was counted in the client’s presence before the receipt was written. Nevertheless, only $11,892 was actually deposited into the bank by ICE HSI agents.

We immediately filed a verified demand for early judicial court action and complained about the missing money. Shortly thereafter, we received a letter from Mary Ann Cranford, with the title “Fines, Penalties, & Forfeitures Officer” at the U.S. Customs and Board Protection Office in Tampa dated April 6, 2016.

The letter indicated that Mary Ann Cranford had received our verified claim demanding the immediate return of funds taken by Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”) Special Agent (“SA”) Carlos Carrasquillo at the Tampa International Airport.

The letter advised that the U.S. Attorney’s Office has chosen not to file a forfeiture action in Court. The letter stated: “Accordingly, this office will submit a request to the National Finance Center to issue a refund in the amount of $11,892” which was the total amount presented to the CBP office after the seizure.

On November 27, 2019, before boarding an international flight out of the Tampa International Airport, an agent with U.S. Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) seized $16,563.00 from our client because the unreported currency was not listed on a FinCEN Form 105.

Although most of these types of seizures go unchallenged, our client found us by searching from his cell phone and contacted the firm while he was still at the airport after the seizure. We immediately preserved the airport surveillance video and filed a verified claim for court action to bypass any administrative proceeding.

On February 28, 2020, we received a letter from Robert M. Del Toro, the Fines, Penalties & Forfeitures Officer for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in Tampa, FL. The letter indicated that CBP received all of our correspondence regarding the seizure of $16,563.00 in U.S. Currency, including the demand for court action.

The letter indicated that “[a]fter a full review of the matter, it has been determined that the seized currency will be returned. Therefore,  we have initiated a full refund which will be paid through the National Finance Center… You may expect this payment in approximately 2-3 weeks from the date of this letter.”

Most airports do not post adequate signs or make announcements about the currency reporting requirement for travelers departing the United States on an international flight. Even if the traveler somehow knew about the requirement, being able to comply would be onerous. As a result, seizures of unreported U.S. Currency not listed on the FinCEN Form 105 are common.

On November 9, 2020, we received a letter of “Judicial Forfeiture Declination” from Robert M. Del Toro, the Fines, Penalties & Forfeitures Officer with the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office Field Operations in Tampa, FL, regarding the seizure of more than $40,000.00 in U.S. Currency that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) seized in Brevard County, FL, after a routine traffic stop.

Immediately after the seizure, we filed a claim demanding court action and judicial referral. We also acted quickly to preserve video surveillance that showed problems with the way the money was seized. After a review of the matter, the Government decided to release the property instead of filing a complaint for forfeiture in the U.S. District Court.

In October 2020, the DEA seized $18,000 from a traveler at the Jacksonville International Airport. Shortly after being retained, we took steps to preserve the video of the initial detention from the JAA Internal Auditor. We then filed a verified claim for court action. After the Assistant United States Attorney failed to file a complaint for forfeiture within the 90 day deadline, all seized funds were returned in April of 2021.

Our client was charged with domestic violence battery. On January 25, 2022, at the scheduled Jury Trial hearing date, the State announced a Nolle Prosse which dismissed the charge.

An arrest warrant for violation of probation (VOP) was issued for our client in 2021 after he failed to report and failed to complete some probation conditions. After our client completed the outstanding conditions, we filed a motion to recall the VOP warrant. Prior to the hearing on the motion, we spoke to the State Attorney and convinced them to allow the client’s probation to terminate rather than going forward with a VOP hearing. Once the case was called in court, the State withdrew the VOP affidavit altogether and chose not to move forward with prosecuting the violation of probation. As a result, the warrant was recalled, and his probation was terminated with no violation on October 25, 2022.

Our client’s husband was arrested, and her vehicle was subject to seizure by the Sheriff’s Office under the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act. We promptly filed a demand for an adversarial preliminary hearing to challenge the seizure and assess if probable cause existed to justify it. Upon receiving our demand, the Sheriff’s Office chose to release the vehicle, allowing our client to regain possession without further legal proceedings.

April 24, 2009 – State v. A.L. – Motion to vacate the conviction for DWLS unknowingly in Citation 7828CXF, granted in County Court for Hernando County in Brooksville, FL, thereby causing the Florida habitual traffic offender revocation to be removed.

Refusal Civil Penalty in a BUI Case Dismissed

Our client was charged with “Refusal to Submit to Breath Test – Boating Citation” in connection with a BUI arrest. After the BUI charge was reduced to a civil infraction for careless boating, the Honorable Dustin Anderson, county court judge, on March 24, 2022, dismissed this civil infraction for refusal as well. Contesting the civil infraction for refusal in a BUI case is important because a second accusation of refusal in the future would otherwise constitute a separate crime punishable by up to 12 months in jail.

Our client was originally investigated for a DUI following a traffic crash. Our client was formally charged with DUI (above 0.15) on December 11, 2023, in a case pending before Polk County Judge Green. We filed a motion to exclude the medical blood results, which were the basis for the enhanced DUI charge. To avoid a hearing on the motion to exclude the medical blood results, the State offered to reduce the enhanced DUI charge to a reckless driving charge for a withhold of adjudication and court costs. Our client was able to avoid probation and having to do any DUI-related sanctions. Our client is also eligible to petition to seal this charge from her record.

In September of 2019, our client was detained at the Orlando International Airport (OIA). After finding $63,490 in U.S. currency in a checked bag, federal agents with the Department of Homeland Security seized the bag without a warrant. The agents then located our client who was boarding the domestic flight.

After being removed from the flight and enduring a prolonged detention, the client signed a “notice of abandonment and assent to forfeiture of prohibited or seized merchandise” form 4607 which was witnesses by a special agent with Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).

On October 11, 2019, we filed a claim for early judicial intervention or court action. The AUSA assigned to the case didn’t file the complaint until January 15, 2019. The verified complaint for forfeiture in rem alleged that the law enforcement officers seized the currency because there was probable cause to believe that the Defendant Funds constituted:

1. Money furnished or intended to be furnished by a person in exchange for a controlled substance in violation of the Controlled Substances Act;
2. Proceeds traceable to such an exchange; or
3. Money used or intended to be used to facilitate a violation of the Controlled Substances Act.

After showing the AUSA our basis for having the case dismissed, the AUSA filed for Voluntary Dismissal which was granted on February 5, 2020. We received a check for the entire $63,490.00 on February 24, 2020, which was approximately 5 months after the seizure of cash from the Orlando International Airport.

This client hired our firm in April 2022 after a vehicle crash that ultimately led the State Attorney’s Office to charge the client with DUI and four other charges. In January 2024, after almost 2 years of fighting the charges and filing a motion to dismiss, the state dropped four charges and reduced the DUI to Reckless Driving, in part, because of insufficient evidence of impairment.

Our client was originally investigated for a DUI following a traffic crash. Our client was formally charged with DUI (above 0.15) on December 11, 2023, in a case pending before Polk County Judge Green. We filed a motion to exclude the medical blood results, which were the basis for the enhanced DUI charge. To avoid a hearing on the motion to exclude the medical blood results, the State offered to reduce the enhanced DUI charge to a reckless driving charge for a withhold of adjudication and court costs. Our client was able to avoid probation and having to do any DUI-related sanctions. Our client is also eligible to petition to seal this charge from her record.

March 23, 2009 – State v. A.S. – Motion to vacate citation 08000131FNR granted in Clearwater, Pinellas County, thereby saving client from a 90 day suspension of her driver’s license for excessive points.

Organized Fraud Charges Entered into Diversion in Hillsborough County

On May 23, 2018, in case 2018-CF-002XXX, our client was able to enter diversion in front of the Honorable Vivian Corvo with the opportunity to have his case completely dismissed. We were able to negotiate that the only term would be to pay back restitution so that one mistake would not jeopardize his future. Upon completion of diversion in Hillsborough County (also known as Pretrial Intervention or PTI), the charges will be dismissed and he will have the opportunity to expunge his record.

Our client who was the real victim in a domestic incident with her husband was arrested and taken to jail on a Battery case in 21-CM-XXXX99. Fortunately, justice was served as we were able to achieve a quick Notice of Termination of Prosecution from the State on July 23, 2021, in front of Judge Taylor. This pending case would have had huge ramifications in her divorce and custody case with her children.

Our client was charged with leaving the scene of a crash involving another occupied vehicle. The police then went to our client’s home to issue her a notice to appear in court. On February 23, 2022, the State Attorney’s Office in Tampa, FL, entered a nolle prosequi which dropped the only charge pending against the client.

Judge in Hillsborough County Vacates the Final RPO after Hearing with Witnesses – In January of 2023, The Honorable Denise Pomponio, in Hillsborough County, FL, vacated a Petition for a Final Risk Protection Order requested by the Hillsborough County Sherriff’s Office. Judge Pomponio determined that our client did not pose a significant danger to themselves or others by possessing a firearm.

VOP Warrant Set Aside, VOP Dismissed, and New Law Offense (DWLS) Dropped in Tampa

On May 22, 2018, in case 2017-CT-017XXX, the Honorable Scott Farr in Division C granted our motion to set aside a warrant and dismissed our client’s VOP. Our client had a warrant for an inadvertent mistake she made while on DUI probation. She thought the administrative suspension she received as a result of having a breath alcohol result above .08 was one and the same as the criminal Driver License suspension she received as a part of her DUI plea. Because of this, she drove on a license she thought was valid and received a VOP and a warrant. Our client was extremely worried about going to jail on the warrant as she has a career and is in school. Our office filed a Motion to set aside the VOP warrant, and Judge Farr set aside the warrant based on our client’s inadvertent mistake and also dismissed the VOP because her violation was not willful. In addition, because our client secured a valid hardship license, the State also agreed to Nolle Prosse (drop) her new Driving on a Suspended License charge when we provided proof of same on May 31, 2018.

Our client was formally charged with Boating Under the Influence in violation of Fla. Stat. Section 327.35 in Pasco County, FL. We contacted the State several times to highlight problems with their case, specifically the complete lack of evidence. We also provided an independent drug test indicating that no substances had been ingested by our client. After two trial continuances, the State ultimately agreed to Nolle Prosse the charge on February 22, 2024.

Attorneys Katherine Aranda and Dominique Celerin took their client’s boating under the influence (BUI) case to trial on May 22, 2024. The jury returned a “not guilty” verdict.

On October 30, 2018, DEA seized $52,620.00 at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in Broward County, FL,  from our client. We immediately filed a claim to contest the forfeiture in the United States District Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 983, et. seq, 19 U.S.C. Sections 1602-1619, Title 21 CFR Sections 1316.71-1316.81.

On February 6, 2019, we receive a letter from the DEA’s Office of Operations Management of the Asset Forfeiture Section acknowledging that it received the submission of the claim. The claim was accepted and the matter was referred to the United States Attorney for the Civil Division in the Southern District of Florida.

After sending various financial documents to the AUSA assigned to the case, we were able to show a legitimate source of the funds. We also provided information about technical and procedural problems that impacted the AUSA being able to file a complaint.

On April 22, 2019, we received a letter informing us of the “decision to return” the entire $52,620.

Our client was charged with domestic violence battery. Our office engaged in depositions of the alleged victim and several other witnesses in the matter. In the depositions, we identified inconsistencies in the testimony of the victim. On February 22, 2023, the day before the scheduled Jury Trial hearing, the State announced a Nolle Prosse, which dismissed the charge.

Our client was charged with Aggravated Battery and Great Bodily Harm. Our office gathered extensive evidence showing that our client was not at the scene of the alleged incident. On February 22, 2023, the day before the scheduled Jury Trial hearing, the State announced a Nolle Prosse, which dismissed the charge.

Our client was arrested on October 22, 2024, for a violation of probation for an underlying charge of DUI. 4. Polk County. We first filed a bond motion allowing our client to be released from custody on her own recognizance pending a violation of probation hearing. This allowed her to complete some of her outstanding conditions of probation pending a case resolution. We presented those completed conditions to the State and to the probation officer. The probation officer decided to rescind their original offer of 60 days jail and to instead withdraw the violation altogether to allow our client to continue on probation with no violation on her record.

12 Month Refusal Suspension Set Aside at Tampa BAR

On September 21, 2020, a field hearing officer at the DHSMV’s Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, issue a final order on the results of the formal review hearing which invalidated the 12 month administrative suspension for refusing to submit to a breath, blood, or urine test. At the hearing, several troopers with the Florida Highway Patrol testified. After reviewing the packet of information submitted by the trooper and listening to the testimony and arguments, the hearing officer determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension “because the arrest was not lawful.”

On November 21, 2022, a Hearing Officer with the Bureau of Administrative Review in Tampa, FL, entered a final order on the results of the review hearing invalidating the six (6) month revocation after a DUI arrest. The order stated that the hearing officer determined insufficient evidence supported the suspension because the arresting officer with the Tampa Police Department failed to appear at the hearing after being served with a subpoena.

In a different case decided on November 21, 2022, a Hearing Officer with the Bureau of Administrative Review in Clearwater, FL, entered a final order on the results of the review hearing invalidating the six (6) month revocation after a DUI arrest. The order stated that the hearing officer determined insufficient evidence supported the suspension because the arresting officer with the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office failed to appear at the hearing after being properly served with a subpoena.

On August 21, 2024, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer invalidated an 18-month suspension because there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension since the “DUI evidentiary packet was not received” from the Tampa Police Department in time.

In January 2021, CBP seized $57,000 from a traveler at the Tampa International Airport. Before attempting to board a domestic flight, the traveler was detained and questioned near Gate A. Shortly thereafter, the traveler was escorted to the Tampa International Airport Police Station, where the detention continued for more than three hours. The traveler’s $57,000 was eventually seized, and the receipt listed an “undisclosed amount” of U.S. Currency.

Immediately after we were retained, we filed a claim for court action and preserved all video from Gate A and the police station. We convinced CBP to return all the $57,000.00 after showing problems with the legality of the warrantless search and prolonged detention.

On January 21, 2020, in Division F in Tampa, Florida, the State was forced to “nolle prosse” or drop, a Double Information charging our client with two Battery charges. We set the case for trial as we knew the alleged victim did not wish to prosecute and the second alleged victim did not live in the area. Despite the State’s threat to revoke all offers, we pressed on and were able to provide our client a clear record in 19-CM-XXXX55.

On January 21, 2020, the State Attorney’s Office in Tampa was forced to drop a Domestic Violence Battery charge against our client in 19-CM-XXXX01 after the case was set for a Jury Trial. Prior to the day of trial the State was insistent that they would not drop the case despite the alleged victim not wanting to prosecute. At the Pretrial Conference, the State indicated it would attempt to prove the cases at trial based on our client’s statements regardless of whether the alleged victim cooperated or not. Had our client accepted the State’s offer, he would have been subject to the very expensive and inconvenient burden of Domestic Violence Intervention, a program that typically requires 26-29 weeks of Batterer Intervention classes. Because our client had confidence in our process, he was spared the inconvenience of DVIP and can now apply to expunge his record.

Our client hired us to represent her in New Port Richey. She had no prior history. Although she was initially unable to see her children, after we were retained, those restrictions were lifted. We provided information to the prosecutor showing that no crime occurred. The State ultimately filed a No Information on July 21, 2021, in Judge Handsel’s division.

On February 21, 2024, our firm was successful in convincing the State Attorney’s Office not to file any formal charge against our client, who had been arrested for Domestic Battery.

On August 21, 2023, we convinced the State Attorney’s Office to drop an Aggravated Battery with a Deadly Weapon charge. We also got the court in another county to dismiss the accusation of violation of probation a few weeks later.

May 20, 2009 – State v. J.T., Case Number 2007-CT-000786, Bradenton, Manatee County, Florida, Judge Robery A. Farrance, County Judge, granted the Motion to Vacate and Set Aside the Judgement and Sentence for the criminal offense of Driving While License Suspended or Revoked after an evidentiary motion hearing. The man’s license had been revoked as a HTO for almost two years before he retained the firm. We were able to file the Rule 3.850 motion just a few days before the 2 year deadline passed. The State Attorney’s Office refused to consent to the motion so a hearing was conducted. The issue in the case was whether the man’s plea was involuntary when he did not know the plea would cause a five year suspension, and he did not understand the other rights he was giving up by entering the plea. The Manatee County Judge granted the motion on May 20, 2009. The man’s driver’s license became valid a few days later when the DMV lifted the HTO revocation. On June 9th, 2009, the State filed a “nolle prosequi” which dropped the charge of DWLSR for the 2007 underlying offense. The man did not have to enter a plea to any offense because the charge was completely dropped.

On April 20, 2020, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer with the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Reviews entered an order setting aside the administrative suspension of the driver’s license triggered by an unlawful breath or blood alcohol level. The hearing officer found insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear after being properly served with a subpoena.

Twelve Month Administrative Suspension for Refusal Invalidated

On September 20, 2021, HSMV Field Hearing Officer George L. Winslow, Jr., issued an order invalidating the 12 month administrative suspension. The administrative suspension was triggered by an officer with the Orange County Sheriff’s Office after a DUI arrest involving a refusal to submit to a breath test.

At the hearing, we argued that the suspension should be invalidated because the investigatory stop was not based upon a lawful well-founded suspension that our client was or was about to become involved in criminal activity.

In our case, our client was asleep or unconscious, properly parked in a marked paved parking lot, engine off, sitting behind the wheel of the vehicle. Our client awoke on his own as a Deputy stood outside the vehicle. The Deputy’s report states that he observed our client to be disoriented, and his eyes were bloodshot.

The Deputy asked our client to exit the vehicle and our client asked if he had to get out. The Deputy responded that he needed to exit the vehicle so that the Deputy could see if he was alright. After he exited the vehicle the Deputy then reported seeing additional clues of impairment that eventually resulted in the DUI arrest and refusal.

Case Dismissed After Motion to Suppress Granted

On April 20, 2022, the State stood silent on our motion to suppress or exclude evidence illegally gathered during a prolonged detention and request for urine. Our client has submitted to a breath test after a DUI arrest, but the breath alcohol concentration was below the legal limit at .075/.073. After the breath test, the arresting officer illegally requested a urine sample without reasonable cause that our client was under the influence of any chemical or controlled substance.

Driving Under the Influence Charge in Orange County Amended to Reckless Driving

On May 20, 2022, the state agreed to reduce our client’s second DUI charge to reckless driving after we filed a Motion to Suppress based upon an unlawful stop. Our client was found asleep in his vehicle and illegally asked to exit his vehicle for a DUI Investigation. The negotiated plea was a withhold adjudication of guilt to the reduced charge of reckless driving with six months probation, 50 hours of community service with a half buy-out, DUI School Level 2, and Victim Impact Panel.

On September 20, 2022, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, set aside the suspension of the driving privileges for driving with an unlawful alcohol level. The hearing officer explained that after reviewing the facts of the case, there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the DUI evidentiary packet was not received. A copy of the order was provided to the University of South Florida Police Department.

On June 13, 2018, DEA seized $13,260 from our client at the Orlando International Airport. That same amount was deposited into the bank by the DEA agents. After we were retained in the case, we submitted a packet of information including a verified claim for judicial court action before the deadline on August 28, 2018.

On September 20, 2018, Merri L. Hankins, Senior Attorney for the DEA’s Asset Forfeiture Section wrote us a letter informing us of the decision to return the $13,260 in U.S. Currency.

On April 14, 2018, several DEA agents seized $30,000 in cash from our client. Immediately after the seizure, the DEA issued our client a “receipt for cash or other items” which listed an “undetermined amount of US Currency.” The DEA agents then sealed the cash in a bag and took it to the bank to be deposited.

On June 7, 2018, the DEA send our client a “notice of seizure of property and initiation of administrative forfeiture proceedings” which described the property as $29,000 in U.S. Currency. $1,000 went missing.

On July 11, 2018, we send via “federal express priority overnight” a claim to contest the forfeiture of the property in U.S. District Court (a request for immediate judicial action).  Our claim forced the DEA to stop the administrative forfeiture proceeding and forward the case to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for further proceedings.

Because of several problems that we pointed out, the U.S. Attorney’s Office refused to take any action in the case. Shortly thereafter, we received a letter dated November 15, 2018, from the Senior Attorney with the Asset Forfeiture Section of the DEA informing us of the decision “to return” the $29,000. We competed the UFMS Vendor Request Form as requested.

On December 20, 2018, we received the check for $29,375.89.

In September of 2020, agents with CBP seized $17,280 from a traveler at the Orlando International Airport. Shortly after we were retained, we preserved all of the surveillance videos of the initial detention from the Orlando Aviation Authority. After filing a verified claim, we presented information to CBP about the illegality of the initial detention, search, and seizure. The CBP ultimately decided to return all of the funds seized.

In September of 2020, DEA seized $47,000 from our client at the Newark Liberty International Airport. Shortly after we were retained, we took steps to preserve any surveillance video of the initial detention from the Port Authority. We then filed a verified claim for court action and provided information about problems with the legality of the initial detention. The Assistant United States Attorney decided not to file a complaint within the 90 day deadline. The funds were returned shortly thereafter.

In October 2020, a DEA Special Agent seized more than $36,000 from our client at the JFK International Airport. We took steps to preserve the video of our client’s initial detention by TSA at the checkpoint and later detention by DEA at the gate. After filing a verified claim for court action, we were contacted by an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) at the Asset Forfeiture Unit for the Eastern District of New York. After showing problems with the legality of the initial detention, the AUSA failed to file a complaint within the 90-day deadline, and the DEA returned the seized funds shortly thereafter.

In October 2020, DEA seized more than $78,000 from a traveler at the JFK International Airport. After we were retained, we took steps to preserve any surveillance video of the initial detention. After filing a verified claim for court action, a Senior Law Clerk with the Forfeiture Support Associates, LLC, contacted us to find out whether we would be amenable to a CAFRA extension to see if the case could be resolved prior to the filing of a complaint. We declined this invitation but provided information showing problems with how the initial detention occurred. We were then contacted by an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) with the Asset Forfeiture Unit in the Eastern District of New York. Ultimately, the AUSA failed to file the complaint within the 90 day deadline, and the funds were returned shortly thereafter.

On October 18, 2020, an agent with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized $30,830.00 from our client at the Dallas/Ft. Worth (DFW) Airport. Before hiring our firm, the client attempted to file a pro se claim, but received correspondence from D.M. Nichols, Fines, Penalties & Forfeiture Officer and Paralegal Specialist Steven M. McGuirk at the Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport.

The letter claimed that the initial claim filed by the client on a pro se basis appeared to be “in conflict” about whether an administrative or judicial proceeding was being requested. After we were retained, we filed a second verified claim for court action on the client’s behalf, which CBP received on December 30, 2020.

More than 90 days later, the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) filed a complaint for forfeiture in the Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas Dallas. We provided proof that the 90 day CAFRA deadline was missed. CPB agreed to return the money and the AUSA then filed a Motion for Voluntary Dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. R. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). The motion explained:

“This dismissal is based on the untimely nature of the complaint, filed more than 90 days after an initial claim was made to Customs and Border Patrol for the $30,830 in question. Plaintiff has spoken with counsel for the Claimant of the $30,830 and understands there are no objections to this dismissal.”

On 1/20/22, we received notice from CBP that it was returning more than $22,000 seized from our client at the Bradley International Airport, Windsor Locks, in Hartford County, CT. We filed a verified claim for court action to bypass the administrative procedure for remission or mitigation. We also filed a demand to preserve the surveillance video and obtain the seizing agent’s investigation report from Homeland Security Investigations. Based on the report, we showed the AUSA several problems with the seizure, including:

1. The K9 provided a “false positive” alert since no narcotics were found, and the agent didn’t bother to actually test for any trace narcotics on the currency before depositing the money into the bank.
2. The amount seized is not a particularly large amount of U.S. Currency, especially for someone in our client’s position, given his income and net worth.
3. TSA has no business monitoring and detaining passengers for carrying U.S. currency, especially for just over $28,000.
4. The initial detention by TSA, which was illegal from its inception, was prolonged for an even longer period of time by the HSI agent as it attempted to gather enough highly circumstantial “evidence” to meet its interpretation of the probable cause standard.
5. The seizing agent had no search warrant or legal basis to open the luggage or observe the money.
6. No free and voluntary consent for the search was given under those circumstances.
7. None of the client’s statements were actually contradictory. Instead, the agents kept asking the same questions over and over again.
8. The client’s explanation that he intended to use the money to buy a vehicle was reasonable and supported by the evidence presented.

On February 6, 2024, more than $20,000 in U.S. Currency was seized for forfeiture at the Jacksonville International Airport. The client hired us the next day. On February 8, 2024, we sent a preservation letter and public record request to the Department of Aviation Security or Internal Auditor at the Jacksonville Aviation Authority (JAA). The letter was to obtain any airport surveillance video showing our client’s initial detention before he was moved to an interrogation room where his luggage was searched and his money was seized. The client also reported that the DEA task force officer seized his cell phone and attempted to delete a video he had taken during his initial detention.

Instead of releasing the surveillance video, the Internal Auditor at JAA forwarded our request to Bradley A. Boyle, Group Supervisor, DEA Jacksonville District Office. Possibly because they didn’t want the video released, the seizing agents indicated they might be willing to release the money if we provided additional documents. We were later contacted by Special Agent John Hollingsworth, DEA Jacksonville District Office, who requested our client sign a DEA-48 (Disposition of Non-Drug Evidence) and Secured Party Indemnity Agreement. That agreement falsely claimed the money had been used in violation of Title 21 of the United States Code. It included a “hold harmless” provision that would have protected DEA from further liability. That proposed agreement also contained language that would have precluded any innocent owner/lienholder defenses if the money were seized again.

When we refused to sign those documents, we received an email from Merri Hankins, Senior Attorney in DEA’s Asset Forfeiture Section, who clarified that “DEA is attempting to return your client’s funds per a procedure referred to as ‘quick release’ found in 28 CFR 8.7.” The quick release was approved even though we had already filed a premature claim on the client’s behalf with DEA on February 20, 2024.

After some negotiation, DEA allowed the client to retrieve all of his money from the sealed evidence bag on March 1, 2024, without signing any of the agreements prepared by DEA.

On July 20, 2020, the Assistant State Attorney filed a “letter of release” to drop the charges for False Imprisonment and Domestic Violence Battery. As a result, the charges were “no-filed.” Prior to that decision, we were able to talk with the alleged victim and provide exculpatory evidence to the prosecutor showing that our client was not guilty of the incident that allegedly occurred on June 9, 2020, in Hillsborough County, FL.

On April 20, 2022, after a three-day trial, a jury decided that our client had not defamed her ex-boyfriend when she filed a police report and injunction petition alleging he pulled a gun on her.

Our client was subjected to the Marchman Act over 20 years ago when he was a juvenile for smoking marijuana. Agreeing to treatment in the Marchman Act process caused a firearm disability, meaning he could not own or possess a firearm. We filed a motion with the courts to remove the firearm disability. We helped our client get an evaluation by a doctor specializing in risk assessments. The doctor found that our client was not abusing substances and presented no risk to others. On January 20, 2023, the Judge granted our motion, allowing our client to regain his 2nd Amendment right.

On October 20, 2023, we convinced the State Attorney’s Office not to file any charges against our client who had been arrested for Domestic Battery.

In October 2020, DEA seized more than $78,000 from a traveler at the JFK International Airport. After we were retained, we took steps to preserve any surveillance video of the initial detention. After filing a verified claim for court action, a Senior Law Clerk with the Forfeiture Support Associates, LLC, contacted us to find out whether we would be amenable to a CAFRA extension to see if the case could be resolved prior to the filing of a complaint. We declined this invitation but provided information showing problems with how the initial detention occurred. We were then contacted by an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) with the Asset Forfeiture Unit in the Eastern District of New York. Ultimately, the AUSA failed to file the complaint within the 90 day deadline, and the funds were returned shortly thereafter.

March 19, 2010 – R.R. v. State – Case Number 2005 TR 23878 and 2006TR 3078 – Judge in Bradenton, Manatee County, granted two motions to vacate prior convictions for driving while license suspended without knowledge which then allowed our client to lift the 5 year habitual traffic offender revocation so that he could obtain a valid driver’s license. The court also allowed our client to reenter the plea, this time receiving a withhold of adjudication on the civil infractions which does not count toward a habitual traffic offender revocation.

VOP Dismissed in Tampa, Florida

On July 19, 2018, a VOP hearing was held in 18-CM-002XXX in front of the Honorable Miriam Valkenburg in Division A in Tampa, Florida. We argued that this VOP should never have been entered as our client was being violated for failing to take a drug test he should have never been subject to. In the original Judgment & Sentence, the court had ordered drug screens after a 45 day period. Probation elected to have our client submit to a drug screen earlier than he was ordered to, and he missed the urine screen. Because of probation’s error, we were able to get this VOP dismissed.

Sexual Violence Injunction Dismissed

July 19, 2018 – In a hard fought battle, our firm ultimately won an extensive hearing on a sexual violence injunction in front of Judge Perrone in Division G in Hillsborough County. In 18-DR-29XX, the opposing counsel continued to drag out this matter in hopes of our client agreeing to the injunction in some form within the divorce proceedings. We refused to settle, and the court had a full hearing with witnesses and evidence on July 19, 2018. We had extensive evidence to show that the allegations were not true based on a severely delayed reporting and failure to cooperate with law enforcement. The court dismissed the injunction finding there was no competent substantial evidence to award an injunction.

Warrant Withdrawn and Aggravated Battery Deadly Weapon/Battery Case No Filed in Hernando County

July 19, 2018 – Our client who lived out of state discovered a warrant in Hernando County. Our firm was retained and immediately got to work to withdraw the warrant. We filed a motion to withdraw the warrant, and addressed with the State Attorney’s Office why this charge should never be filed and if it was we intended to file a Stand Your Ground motion. The State, in 18-CF-001XXX, agreed to withdraw the warrant and entered a no file on July 19, 2018 on very serious charges. Our client avoided a trip to Florida and never set foot in a courtroom.

Our client was arrested for Felony Possession of Cannabis Sativa Resin in 18-CF-015XXX. We presented mitigation to the State Attorney’s Office and based on the mitigation, the State filed a Letter of Release and declined to file any charges on December 19, 2018.

BUI in Pasco Reduced to Civil Careless Boating with a Withhold of Adjudication

On April 19, 2021, the day the BUI case was scheduled for jury selection, the court accepted the plea to an amended charge of civil “careless boating” and withheld adjudication. Instead of facing any criminal penalty, the client agreed to pay court costs for a civil violation. The client was then eligible to expunge any criminal record.

The client was originally charged with Boating Under the Influence (BUI) after being detained near the Anclote River Park boat ramp in Pasco County by Officer Miros Petru of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). After a Boating Safety Inspection, the client agreed to participate in the seated battery of sobriety exercises including the palm pat task. FWC Officer Damon Pulaski arrived at the scene with a mobile Intoxilyzer 8000 (breathalyzer) in this marked patrol vehicle immediately after the arrest.

We filed and litigated a motion to suppress evidence, in part, because of an illegal detention, failure to properly administer the field tests, and a lack of probable cause for the arrest. Although that motion was denied, the prosecutor ultimately agreed to reduce the case from the criminal offense to a civil violation of “careless boating” under Section 327.33(2) a few days before the jury selection was scheduled to begin.

18 Month Hard Suspension for Refusal Invalidated

On April 19, 2022, a hearing officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews issued an order invalidating a 6 month suspension for driving with an unlawful alcohol level. The suspension was invalidated because the arresting officer with the Brandon Police Department failed to appear for the hearing.

On December 12, 2018, agents with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized $30,000 in cash at the Tampa International Airport from our client without providing a receipt. A few days later we requested a receipt showing that $30,000 had been taken.

The authorities confirmed that an undetermined amount of currency was seized but claimed it had not yet been counted. Eventually we were provided with a receipt from CBP which correctly listed the total of $30,000 in U.S. Currency being seized.

Shortly after the seizure, we preserved the airport surveillance video of the agents who conducted the initial interrogation, search, and seizure. Because part of the detention of the seized cash occurred at the Tampa International Airport Police Department (TIAPD), we also preserved the surveillance video of that part of the detention.

On January 1, 2019, we created an election of proceedings form and verified CAFRA seized asset claim to trigger the case be forwarded to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for early judicial action.

We received a letter dated March 16, 2019, from the Fines, Penalties and Forfeitures Officer for U.S. Customs and Border Protection which indicated that “[a]fter a full review of this matter, our office determined that the currency will be returned to your client. Therefore, $30,000 in U.S. currency will be returned to [your client] within three to four weeks.”

We agreed to complete a CAFRA Hold Harmless Release Agreement in consideration for the return of all of the property. The form required our client to forever release the United States from any claim in connection with the detention, seizure, and/or release by U.S. Customs and Border Protection of the above-listed property.

The agreement also required our client to waive any claim to attorney’s fees, interest, or any other relief not specifically provided for in the agreement. We finally received the check for $30,000 on April 19, 2019.

In July of 2020, CBP agents seized $13,522 from a husband and wife who were traveling together for an international flight out of the Detroit Metropolitan Airport. Normally, you do not need to declare on the FinCEN 105 form the amount of cash that you are bringing into or out of the United States on an international flight unless you are carrying more than $10,000.

Although neither of them had more than $10,000 in their possession, CBP seized the money after alleging that the husband and wife distributed the money between them with the intent to evade the currency reporting requirement of Title 31, United States Code, Section 5316. After filing the verified claim for court action and showing all of the reasons that the seizure was unjustified, on October 16, 2020, we learned that the AUSA decided not to file a complaint. The check arrived on November 19, 2020.

On February 18, 2020, the prosecutor filed a notice of nolle prosequi for a DUI case involving a DUI enforcement officer with the Tampa Police Department. By filing the nolle prosequi the prosecutor dropped the charge. The DUI case involved a BAC level below the legal limit. The client also submitted to a urine test which came back clean. Although the client was offered RIDR with a withhold of adjudication on a reckless driving, we requested all of the information and demand that all charges were dropped completely.

On February 18, 2020, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Review office in Clearwater, FL, invalidated a six month administrate suspension because the hearing officer determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because of no evidence to place the driver in physical control.

DUBAL Six (6) Month Administrative Suspension Set Aside

On June 18, 2021, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the DHSMV’s Bureau of Administrative Reviews office issued a final order that set aside the administrative suspension of our client’s driver license for driving with an unlawful alcohol level (DUBAL). The order provided:

“Upon reviewing the facts of the case, the Department Hearing Office has determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear.”

A copy of the order was provided to the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office.

Our client was originally charged with Driving Under the Influence under Fla. Stat. Section 316.193 in Hillsborough County, FL. We filed a Motion to Exclude Blood Alcohol Results. In order to avoid a hearing on the motion, the State offered our client a reduced charge of Reckless driving. On January 18, 2023, our client entered a plea to the reduced charge of Reckless Driving, avoiding a DUI conviction and any DUI sanctions.

On June 18, 2024, an HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Reviews (BAR) office issued a final order invalidating our client’s 12-month administrative suspension for the alleged refusal. The hearing officer “determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because of conflicting evidence or discrepancies.”

Court Grants Motion to Suppress Evidence During a Prolonged Detention

For a case pending in Pasco County, FL, we filed a motion to suppress or exclude evidence illegally gathered during a prolonged detention. On February 17, 2022, the Court granted the motion, in part, to exclude any evidence after our client indicated to the stopping officer that he wanted to terminate his voluntary participation in Field Sobriety Exercises. The Court issued an order that specifically found that the length of time for the detention at that point became unreasonable. The evidence excluded included all evidence gathered by the arresting officer (who arrived on the scene shortly thereafter) and the alleged refusal to submit to a breath test.

12 Month Refusal Suspension Set Aside 

On February 17, 2022, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Clearwater Bureau of Administrative Reviews (BAR) Office entered a final order setting aside the suspension of driving privileges for refusing to submit to a breath test after an arrest for DUI by an officer with the Clearwater Police Department. The basis for setting aside the suspension was because the arresting office failed to appear at the formal review hearing after properly being served with a subpoena.

On August 17, 2023, just days before the jury trial was scheduled to begin, the Assistant State Attorney at the Lakeland Division, dropped the DUI charge pending against our client, which terminated the prosecution. We had previously gotten the court to throw out the breath test results because of problems with how the Lakeland Police Department maintained the breath test machine (as discussed below).

On August 17, 2023, the State amended the boating under the influence (BUI) charge to reckless operation. As part of the negotiated plea, The Honorable Robert G. Dittmer, a county court judge in Pinellas County, withheld adjudication and imposed $289 in court costs with no probation. The withhold of adjudication allowed our client to be eligible to seal the record. The case involved an arrest for BUI by Officer Kyle Freda with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Our client submitted to field sobriety exercises and a breath test with the machine, returning a result over the legal limit of .08.

In Judge Taylor’s courtroom, we set multiple cases for Non Jury Trial on August 17, 2021. Despite the State’s adamant position that they will not drop cases even though they lacked recent contact with a willing victim, we took the cases to trial. The State was forced to drop all three cases – 21-CM-000XX6, 21-CM-00XX63, 20-CM-XX92.

Our client was originally arrested on a charge of battery. We were retained before the prosecutor formally filed any charge. We contacted the prosecutor and provided additional information about the case that made the chances of a successful prosecution look less certain. After receiving information about problems with the case, the State decided to Nolle Prosse the charge on January 17, 2024.

Our client was originally arrested on a charge of Tampering with a Witness. We were retained before any charges were formally filed by the prosecutor. We contacted the State Attorney’s intake division to discuss the charges and provide additional information about the case. Shortly thereafter, the State Attorney’s Office filed a notice on January 17, 2024, that they were no longer pursuing prosecution on the case.

Our client was designated a habitual traffic offender after paying three DWLS tickets without realizing the consequences. We filed a Motion to Vacate one of the tickets, arguing that our client’s due process rights were violated. The Judge agreed and vacated the conviction. As a result, our client was able to reinstate his license.

Our client’s mother filed an injunction against him. We continued the initial hearing and began discovery, issuing interrogatories and requests for production. Following negotiations, the petitioner agreed to a stipulated settlement agreement and did not appear at the final hearing, leading the Judge to dismiss the injunction.

Our client was arrested for Domestic Violence Battery by Strangulation in 18-CF-014XXX. The alleged victim also filed for an Injunction in 18-DR-014XXX. Our office engaged in depositions of the alleged victim and several other witnesses in the Injunction matter while the felony case was pending in intake at the State Attorney’s Office. In the depositions, we were able to identify inconsistencies in the testimony of the State’s witnesses. The Injunction was dismissed on October 16, 2018, in Division X in front of Judge Weis in Plant City. In addition, the deposition transcripts were provided to the State Attorney and on November 28, 2018, the State Attorney filed a Letter of Release and declined to file any formal charges in his felony case.

On May 16, 2025, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer with the Bureau of Administrative Reviews (BAR) office in Tampa, FL, issue a Final Order invalidating the 6 month administrative suspension because “there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer [with the Bartow Police Department] failed to appear. As a result, the administrative suspension was lifted, instantly restoring the client’s full driving privileges.

Our client was accused of soliciting in Tampa, as a result of a sting. He had no criminal record. Based upon providing extensive mitigation regarding his work history and schooling as well as completing the JADE program and community service early, we successfully achieved a Nolle Prosse in 21-CM-00XX77 in front of Judge Gutman on August 16, 2021. This avoided any sort of conviction and eligibility to expunge the record. Most importantly, our client was able to avoid thhe mandatory statutory $5,000.00 civil penalty.

On February 16, 2023, our firm won a hearing on a sexual violence injunction in front of Judge Perrone in Division G in Hillsborough County. The court dismissed the injunction finding there was no competent substantial evidence to award an injunction. The Petitioner failed to present substantial evidence of any sexual violence committed by our client.

Marijuana Charges Dropped in Tampa Courthouse

On June 15, 2016, in case number 16-CM-00513, the state dropped all charges for Possession of Cannabis and Possession of Paraphernalia in a case pending before Judge Scott Farr, Hillsborough County, Tampa after we filed a Motion to Dismiss based on a lack of evidence to prove constructive possession.

Battery Case Dropped in Tampa, FL

On December 15, 2017, in case number 17-CM-007XXX, pending before the Honorable Judge Vogel in Division F in Hillsborough County, the prosecution entered a written “Nolle Prosse” (dropped the charge) of “Battery”.  The alleged victim had insisted she did not want the State to prosecute this case.  The State refused, however, to drop the charges and instead offered 60 days Hillsborough County Jail.  At the Pretrial Conference, the State amended the offer to an adjudication and court costs and we left the case set for Jury Trial.  The State Attorney’s Office at that time revoked all offers.  Two days later, the State Attorney filed a written “Nolle Prosse” dropping all charges on the Friday before the Jury Trial was set.  We fought aggressively to have our client cleared of all charges despite threats from the State and ultimately we won when we showed the State we are not afraid to go to trial.

No Motor Vehicle Registration Charge Dropped in Tampa, Florida

In 18-CT-006XXX, our client’s charge of No Motor Vehicle Registration was Nolle Prossed on June 15, 2018, after our firm filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that a motorized bicycle does not require vehicle registration under Florida Statute 322.01 (27). This case was set in front of the Honorable Miriam Valkenburg in Division A in Tampa, Florida.

On December 7, 2020, we received a letter from the Fines, Penalties and Forfeiture Officer concerning $48,660 in U.S. Currency that was seized at the Orlando Airport in September of 2020. The letter explains that “[a]fter review of the matter, the Government has decided to release the property to you.” The refund through direct deposit arrived on January 15, 2021.

In this case, we preserved surveillance video from the Orlando International Airport showing the problems with the detention from its inception. We also gathered all of the evidence showing why the funds came from a legitimate source and were intended for a legitimate purpose.

Our client was wrongfully accused by her ex-fiancé of stealing several of his personal belongings at the end of their relationship. We conducted extensive depositions with the alleged victim and his witnesses. Fortunately, our client saved all of her text messages with her ex showing several discrepancies in his deposition testimony, and we were able to provide those to the State. The night before Jury Trial, the State did the right thing and filed a written Nolle Prosse dropping all charges on February 15, 2023.

Our client was charged with battery after an incident involving a long-standing conflict between the victim and our client’s son. We provided evidence that the victim was the instigator in the incident. After reviewing this information, the State dismissed the case.

VOP Warrant Set Aside in Absentia, VOP Dismissed, and Probation Terminated in Tampa, Florida 

On August 14, 2018, in 11-CF-011XXX, the Honorable Nick Nazaretian in Division K granted our firm’s Motion to Withdraw the VOP Warrant and Terminate Probation. Our client was placed on probation as a young adult in 2013 for Battery on a LEO and Resisting with Violence. While our client had substantially complied with the terms of probation, he left the country and a VOP warrant was issued. We were abel to present extensive mitigation and brought witnesses to show the court that our client had substantially complied and the reasons why he left the country. Without our client ever coming to court, we successfully had his probation terminated and the warrant withdrawn. He also kept his withhold of adjudication so that he avoided becoming a convicted felon while still having the opportunity to seal his record in the future.

18 Month Refusal Suspension Set Aside

On January 14, 2021, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer Samantha Simpkins invalidated an administrative suspension for refusing to submit to a breath test after a DUI arrest in Hillsborough County. The order provided that upon review of the facts of the case, the Department Hearing officer has determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension of the petitioner’s driver license due to insufficient documentation submitted to the administrative hearing to establish probable cause of the arrest “because the DUI evidence packet was not received.”

On February 14, 2024, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, issued a final order on the results of the formal review hearing. In the order, the hearing officer determined insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer, a Sumter County Sheriff’s Office deputy, failed to appear. As a result, the six (6) month administrative suspension for having a BAC of .08 or above was invalidated.

On October 14, 2019, the day the jury trial was scheduled to begin, the prosecutor decided to drop or “nol pross” the charge of violating a domestic violence restraining order, a first-degree misdemeanor. That was the only charge pending against our client. The incident occurred on February 11, 2019, when our client was accused of violating a temporary domestic violence injunction against the mother of his children. The police alleged that while the alleged victim was walking her son to school on the sidewalk, the defendant pulled his vehicle over, exited the vehicle, and confronted the victim verbally against her will which upset her. The domestic injunction was in effect at the time and prohibited the defendant from having any contact with the victim unless they were exchanging the child. The security cameras from a nearby gas station captured the entire incident. We also represented the client for the final hearing on the request for a domestic violence injunction, and we were able to get that injunction dismissed as well.

VOP Warrant Avoided and VOP Dismissed in Polk County

August 13, 2018 – Our client received notice of a probation revocation hearing in Polk County. He was in full compliance with his probation, but some of his requirements were lost in translation. On August 13, 2018, we were able to provide all documentation to probation and convince the Probation Officer to withdraw her VOP affidavit thereby preventing a warrant and preventing our client from having to come to Florida in 2017-CM-009XXX in front of Judge Bennett.

6 Month Administrative Suspension Invalidated

On January 13, 2020, a DHSMV Field Hearing Officer in Tampa, FL, invalidated our client’s 6 month administrative suspension for having a breath test reading over .08. The reason for invalidating the suspension was because there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the “arrest was unlawful.” The decision was made after four witnesses testified at the hearing.

12 Month Administrative Suspension for Refusal Invalidated

In another case decided on January 13, 2020, a DHSMV Field Hearing Officer in Tampa, FL, invalidated our client’s 12 month administrative suspension for refusing a breath test after the DUI arrest. The reason for invalidating the suspension was because there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the “arresting officer failed to appear.” The arresting officer worked at Florida Highway Patrol.

Petition for Involuntary treatment under the Marchman Act Dismissed in Hillsborough – On January 13, 2023, the Honorable Judge Michael Scionti in Hillsborough County granted our Motion to Dismiss the Petition for Involuntary Treatment based on Improper Venue.

November 12, 2009 – Judge in Hillsborough County, FL, granted our motion to dismiss charges in 8835-SPO, for driving while license suspended with knowledge, a second degree misdemeanor under rule 3.190(c)(4) because the undisputed facts did not provide the prosecutor with sufficient evidence to show that our client had “knowledge” that her driver’s license was suspended or revoked. In that case, she did not make any statements that she knew, a ticket for an unpaid Florida citation and the fact that her license had been suspended three times in another state was insufficient as a matter of law. The case was dismissed completely.

Battery Charges Dropped Completely in Pinellas County 

On January 12, 2017, in case number 16-09XXX-MM with the Honorable Judge Dorothy Vaccaro, Division E, in Pinellas County, we prepared the case for trial and showed the prosecutor with the State Attorney’s Office favorable evidence that suggested that our client was actually innocent of the battery charges. The prosecutor decided to drop the charges completely before trial.

Administrative Suspension for Refusal Invalidated Because “No Actual Refusal”

On February 12, 2020, a HSMV Hearing Officer invalidated a 12-month administrative suspension for refusing a breath test after the DUI arrest. The arresting officer worked at the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office. At the hearing, the attorney was able to show that the packet contained insufficient evidence that any refusal was willful or happened after the reading of implied consent. The hearing officer agreed by determining “that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because there was no actual refusal.”

DUI Reduced to Reckless

In another case resolved on October 12, 2021, in Division E of County Court in Hillsborough County at the courthouse in Tampa, the prosecutor agreed to reduce the DUI charge to reckless driving even though the client was not eligible for RIDR because of a crash. The negotiated plea was an adjudication of guilt to the reduced charge of reckless driving with 12 months probation to pay a $500 fine plus court costs, 6 months with the ignition interlock, 75 hours of community service with a half buy out, and automatic early termination of probation when all special conditions of probation were completed.

DUI Reduced to Reckless Driving

On October 12, 2021, the state agreed to reduce a DUI charge to reckless driving even though the client was not eligible for RIDR because of their prior record. The negotiated plea was an adjudication of guilt to the reduced charge of reckless driving with 12 months probation to pay a $500 fine plus court costs, 50 hours of community service with a half buy-out, and automatic early termination of probation when all special conditions of probation were completed. The case was resolved in Division E of County Court in Hillsborough County at the courthouse in Tampa.

On August 12, 2022, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, set aside the suspension of the driving privileges for refusal to submit to a breath, blood, or urine test. The hearing officer explained that after reviewing the facts of the case, there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear. A copy of the order was provided to the Florida Highway Patrol.

Our client faced DUI charges. After reviewing bodycam footage and police reports, we presented mitigating evidence to the State, leading to a reduction of the charge to reckless driving.

In October of 2020, DEA seized $18,000 at the Jacksonville International Airport. After requesting the video of the initial detention, we filed a verified claim for court action. On April 12, 2021, DEA agreed to return the funds. The money arrived at our office on April 28, 2021.

On August 16, 2021, we received a letter signed by Graciela B. Espinoza for Robert M. Del Toro, the Director of Fines, Penalties and Forfeitures at the U.S. CBP FPF Office, informing us that the $14,802.00 seized from our two clients before an international flight at the Fort Lauderdale International Airport on February 16, 2021, would be returned. The letter also provided: “The Government has decided to release the property to you.”

We filed a claim on April 12, 2021, which was signed by each client. The claim showed that $6,376 was seized from one client, and $8,426 was signed by the other client by a CBP Agent. The money was combined into one pile by CBP, who then issued only one receipt.

After being contacted by the Senior Attorney with the Office of the Associate Chief Counsel (Miami) for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, we argued that the CBP agents improperly combined the money. We also showed that CBP agents improperly alleged that our clients had more than $10,000 on an international flight after structuring the money to evade the reporting requirement pursuant to Title 31, United States Code, Section 5324 or the FinCEN 105 form by knowingly dividing the currency between themselves so that each was transporting less than $10,000 from a place inside the United States to a place outside of the United States.

Our client faced DUI charges. After reviewing bodycam footage and police reports, we presented mitigating evidence to the State, leading to a reduction of the charge to reckless driving.

Violation of Injunction Charge Dropped in Tampa, Florida

On July 11, 2018, in 18-CM-006XXX, the State dropped a violation of injunction charge after our firm showed the State Attorney’s Office extensive mitigation. This client was plagued with threats from his ex wife on a consistent basis and dragged through the courts in Tampa, Florida on various occasions. Based on our previous representation and ability to get a long standing injunction dismissed on the merits, we were able to provide the State Attorney with a clear look at this case to show that our client should have never been charged at all.

On January 11, 2023, the State Attorney’s Office in Pinellas County agreed not to file formal charges against our client, who was arrested for a Domestic Battery Charge.

Our client was originally arrested on a charge of Battery by Strangulation in Pasco County, FL. We contacted the State Attorney’s intake division to discuss the charges and provide mitigation and additional information from the alleged victim. Following receipt of that information, the State Attorney’s office dropped the charge against our client on December 11, 2023.

June 10, 2009 – State v. J.V. – Habitual traffic offender revocation lifted for a client from Venice, Florida, after a court in North County Traffic Court Sarasota County grants a motion to vacate judgment and sentence for charge of driving while license suspended or revoked without knowledge.

Prosecutor Filed a Letter of Release after Our Client was Arrested for Aggravated Battery

Our client was arrested for aggravated battery with a deadly weapon on July 10, 2017. The offense of Aggravated Battery with a Deadly Weapon under Florida Statute 784.0451A2 is a second-degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in Florida State Prison. During the first 21 days after the arrest, we were able to present evidence showing that our client acted in self-defense. We were also able to show how past difficulties between the parties showed that our client was not guilty of the offense. On September 6, 2017, the State Attorney’s Office agreed and filed a “letter of release” which showed the case filing decision was “no-filed.”

Unlawful Acts in Capacity of a Contractor and Practicing Electric Contracting Without Being Licensed Dropped in Tampa, Florida

On May 10, 2018, in case number 17-CM-013XXX, all charges were Nolle Prossed (dropped) in front of the Honorable Scott Farr in Division C, in Hillsborough County. When our client retained, he was facing jail time. In addition, he was at risk of violating probation in another matter. We were able to present enough mitigation to the prosecutor to show he was completely innocent. After many months of presenting evidence to show he was not guilty of acting as a contractor without a license, the State ultimately dropped charges.

Felony Possession of THC Oil Charge No Filed in Pinellas County

July 10, 2018 – Our client held a valid medical marijuana card, and was arrested in Clearwater. He did not have his card on him, and the officer did not believe him despite him showing proof via his cell phone. Our firm wrote an extensive letter to the State Attorney’s Office providing proof of the medical card and case law showing why the State is obligated to No File the charges. The State no-filed 18-CF-006XXX on July 10, 2018, in front of Judge Andrews.

On August 10, 2022, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, set aside the suspension of the driving privileges for driving with an unlawful alcohol level. The hearing officer explained that after reviewing the facts of the case, there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear. A copy of the order was provided to the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office.

On January 10, 2024, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer with the Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, entered an order invalidating an administrative suspension. The administrative suspension occurred after a DUI arrest by a deputy with the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office. The case involved a breath test reading over .08. The hearing officer determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension.

On April 10, 2024, we received a letter from Robert M. Del Toro, Fines, Penalties and Forfeiture Officer, signed by Rebecca Gabbard, CBP Paralegal Specialist, explaining that our client’s 1992 Land Rover Defender 110, imported from South Africa, seized on 9/20/23, was being returned. The letter explained that the “Government has decided to release the property to you and return the cost bond.” The letter gave further instructions on picking up the vehicle from a government-contracted facility where it was being held. Before receiving this letter, we filed a non-CAFRA claim for court action, posted the cash bond, and negotiated with the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) while explaining why CBP’s allegations were wrong. Ultimately, the AUSA refused to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court, forcing CBP to release the vehicle immediately.

Petitions for Injunction for Protection Against Domestic Violence Dismissed After Evidentiary Hearing – On January 10, 2023, in 22-DR-063XXX, an injunction hearing was heard before the Honorable Judge Daniel Diskey in Pasco County. Judge Diskey dismissed the Injunction against our client after the Petitioner’s testimony did not establish sufficient evidence to allow the court to issue an injunction for protection against domestic violence.

On August 10, 2023, the State Attorney’s Office in Hillsborough County agreed not to file formal charges against our client, who was arrested for two counts of Domestic Battery after we presented evidence in mitigation and explained the potential defenses.

February 9, 2009 – State v. M.G. – Motion to vacate the conviction for DWLSR with knowledge, a misdemeanor offense, citation number 9445EVY, granted by the Honorable James V. Dominguez, County Court Judge in Hillsborough County, FL. Our client was subsequently able to remove the Habitual Traffic Offender (HTO) status and reinstate her driver’s license.

Stand Your Ground Immunity Motion Granted after Hearing

On December 9, 2016, in case number 16-CM-008XXX in Division X with Judge Weis, we filed a Motion to Dismiss based on Stand Your Ground Immunity in a domestic violence case. The Court heard testimony from several witnesses and then decided to grant the motion which dismissed the criminal charge pending against our client.

On January 9, 2017, in case number 16-CM0003XX, in Division B with the Honorable Judge Eric R. Myers in Tampa, we filed a Motion to Dismiss based on the undisputed facts in the case showing that the law enforcement officer attributed the possession of marijuana to someone else but still arrested our client under a constructive and joint theory of possession. Because the evidence in the case didn’t show that our client was in actual or constructive possession, the prosecutor for the State Attorney’s Office decided to stand silent on the motion. The court granted the motion dismissing the only criminal charge against our client.

Exposure of Sexual Organ in Hillsborough County

On February 9, 2017, in case number 16-CM-013XXX, in a different case pending before the Honorable Judge Valkenburg in Division A in Hillsborough County, we were able to keep our client out of custody by having the warrant withdrawn and we ultimately convinced the prosecutor to enter “Nolle Prosse” (dropping the charges).

Charged for Assault on a Licensed Officer Dropped in Tampa

On February 9, 2017, in case number 16-CM-013XXX, pending before the Honorable Judge Miriam Valkenburg in Division A in Hillsborough County, the prosecution entered a “Nolle Prosse” (dropped the charges) of “Assault on a Licensed Officer.” We were able to achieve this resolution after presenting several defense witnesses to the State. Those witnesses explained all of the reasons that our client was actually innocent.

On June 9, 2025, the HSMV Hearing Officer at the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Reviews entered an order finding insufficient evidence to support the administrative suspension for refusing to submit to a breath test because the DUI evidentiary packet was not received by the date of the hearing.

On Tuesday, October 13, 2020, we received a letter from Paralegal Steven M. McGuirk on behalf of D.M. Nichols, Fines, Penalties and Forfeitures Officer at the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Office at 7501 Ester Blvd., Suite 160, Irving, TX 75063, that the “Government has decided to release the property to your client.”

A few days earlier, the Assistant U.S. Attorney with USAO-NDTX Asset Recovery, in Dallas, TX, told us that he “declined to pursue court action in the forfeiture case.” As a result, CBP was required to immediately return 100% of the $14,826 in U.S. Currency seized at the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport (DFW Airport).

Just a few weeks prior to that decision, the AUSA made an offer to return only $2,826 to our client with $12,000 being forfeited to the government. We quickly rejected that offer. 

The seizure of currency by DEA at the Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) Airport involved task force officers with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), HSI IRS Special agents, a DFW Police CID Detective, a Tarrant County Narcotics Detective, and/or K9 drug dogs. The law enforcement officers at the airport in Dallas/Fort Worth, TX, might report conducting “passenger interdiction as part of an ongoing bulk cash smuggling initiative” by making “consensual encounters with random individuals.”

But in many of these cases, a TSA agent secretly provides them with a tip that a traveler is carrying a large amount of U.S. currency. After reviewing the written reports generated during the investigation and gathering additional evidence, we provided the AUSA with all of the reasons that the initial detention was illegal. 

The check for $14,826.00 arrived in our office on November 9, 2020.

Our client was arrested and charged with a DUI. After reviewing the evidence, it was clear that the law enforcement officer in the case did not follow the law and arrested our client without any reason. We filed a Motion to Suppress the evidence where the law enforcement officer acted improperly and arrested our client without any reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Once the Assistant State Attorney read the motion, they agreed. On June 9, 2022, the prosecutor formally reduced the charge from a criminal DUI to a civil traffic ticket for careless driving because the client did not have her headlights on.

Our client faced felony charges for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. By presenting evidence from the night of the incident that the State had not initially reviewed, we were able to demonstrate our client’s innocence, resulting in the State dismissing the charges.

April 8, 2009 – State v. W. H. – County Court Judge in New Port Richey, Pasco County, FL,  granted client’s motion to vacate and set aside conviction for citation 8-0238GAF which prevented the Florida habitual traffic offender suspension from going into effect on April 13, 2009.

October 8, 2009 – State v. P.M., Case No. 2009-TR-23140 – Judge for Brevard County, FL, granted motion to vacate the conviction for a Vero Beach man who was designated a habitual traffic offender because of an offense for DWLSRC without knowledge, which will result in the HTO revocation being immediately lifted.

April 8, 2010 – B.G. v. State – 003984 FQJ – Hillsborough County Traffic Court in Tampa granted motion to set aside a conviction that caused our client to be declared a habitual traffic offender under Florida law. The court then accepted a new plea and this time withheld adjudication so the case would not count toward a HTO revocation. Our client was able to get the HTO order lifted and obtain a valid driver’s license.

Our Client was Granted Protection from Stalking and Avoiding an Injunction in a Cross-Complaint

On December 8, 2016, in case number 16-DR-0171XX with Judge Frances Perrone in Hillsborough County, we helped our client obtain a stalking injunction. During the same hearing, the Court dismissed an cross-injunction that had been filed against our client.

Petition for Injunction for Protection Against Our Client Dismissed

On January 8, 2016, in case number 16-DR-017XXX before the Honorable Judge Frances Perrone in Hillsborough County, we helped our client get an injunction for protection against another person. We also helped our client get the injunction filed by the other person dismissed.

HTO Reversed in Polk County

August 8, 2018 – Our client was habitualized as a traffic offender after paying a traffic ticket for DWLS without knowledge. Our firm filed a Motion to Vacate which was denied without allowing for a hearing. We filed a Motion to Reconsider and demanded a hearing. This was also denied. We did not rest. We chose to attack a criminal DWLS with knowledge wherein our client was not represented by counsel. Judge Grode granted our motion in 17-CT-007XXX and on August 8, 2018, the State Attorney in Winter Haven allowed our client to enter a plea to the reduced charge of NVDL so she would no longer be HTO.

On August 8, 2022, a hearing officer with the Bureau of Administrative Reviews issued a “Final Order Setting Aside the License Suspension.” The order explained that the case was adjudicated under the authority of Chapter 15A-6 of the Florida Administrative Code, and Section 322.2615, Florida Statutes.

The Hearing Officer set aside the suspension of the driving privileges for refusal to submit to a breath test after a DUI arrest by a trooper with the Florida Highway Patrol.

The order explained that after a review of the case, there was insufficient evidence to support the suspension because:

• there was no evidence in the record to establish that implied consent was read to Petitioner by law enforcement;
• the arrest report did not state anywhere in the narrative section that implied consent was read incident to a lawful arrest;
• within the alcohol and drug influence report, the box is checked “no” for implied consent warning given.

On September 8, 2022, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, set aside the suspension of the driving privileges for driving with an unlawful alcohol level. The hearing officer explained that after reviewing the facts of the case, there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the breath test operator failed to appear. A copy of the order was provided to the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office.

On July 8, 2024, a DHSMV Field Hearing Officer with the Bureau of Administrative Reviews in Tampa, FL, issued a final order setting aside the suspension of the driving privilege dated January 3, 2024, for refusal to submit to a breath, blood, or urine test. The order provided: “[u]pon reviewing the facts of the case, the Department Hearing Officer has determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because of no or improper Implied Consent Warning.” The arresting officer that issued the notice of suspension was a trooper with the Florida Highway Patrol.

In September of 2020, CBP seized $18,442.00 at the San Ysidro Border Crossing near San Diego, California. Shortly after being retained, we filed a verified claim. Shortly after filing the claim, we were contacted by a Senior Attorney with CBP’s Office of Assistant Chief Counsel. Based on the documents we submitted, CBP’s Senior Attorney agreed that the circumstances justified a pre-civil settlement in which $17,000 would be refunded to our clients.

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) records, our clients, a husband and wife, were questioned as they were departing the United States at the San Ysidro Border Crossing. In response to being asked whether either was transporting more than $10,000 in U.S. currency or monetary instruments, each reported carrying $8,000. Upon further inspection, officers discovered a total of $18,442, which CBP claimed belonged to the husband. CBP alleged that the husband divided the money to avoid the currency reporting requirement.

The CBP officers claimed they didn’t need probable cause, nor reasonable suspicion to search persons, baggage, or conveyances crossing the  international border for either inbound and outbound border crossings. The currency in this case was not seized with regard to its source and/or use. Rather, it was seized for non-compliance with 31 U.S.C. 5316, which requires an individual to report the transportation of currency over $10,000.00.

Willful failure to report the actual amount over $10,000 in currency is a crime punishable by up to five years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and forfeiture of the currency. (See 31 U.S.C. 5317 & 5322.) Dividing money among multiple travelers so that no single traveler is carrying more than $10,000, is in fact a separate crime commonly known as structuring, and is punishable by up to five years in prison, and a $250,000 fine. (See 31 U.S.C. 5324.)

Nevertheless, neither of our clients were charged with a crime and CBP agreed to return $17,000 to them on February 8, 2021, if they agreed to withdraw their requests that judicial forfeiture proceedings be commenced against the Currency. The balance of $1,442 was retained by the government as a payment in lieu of forfeiture.

On September 8, 2023, a 2014 Mercedes-Benz G550 was seized by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) during a routine traffic stop, alleging a violation of 21 USC 881, along with violations of other federal laws, including 19 U.S.C. §§ 1602-1619, 18 U.S.C. § 983 and 28 C.F.R. Parts 8 and 9. On behalf of the client, Sammis Law Firm filed a claim for court action with DEA. We presented arguments regarding an illegal stop, detention, and arrest, including the fact that the drug dog did not properly alert. After negotiations with the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA), the AUSA declined to file a complaint even though criminal charges were pending, and the DEA was forced to release the vehicle back to our client’s mother.

Our client was originally placed on probation by the Honorable Judge Vaccaro in Pinellas County in September of 2023 for one count of misdemeanor Criminal Mischief. The client was violated by probation for technical violations due to failure to pay financials and testing positive for cocaine on a random urine analysis on December 8, 2023. The client was arrested on the Violation of Probation warrant on December 31, 2023. The client hired Sammis Law Firm on January 2, 2024. Ms. Vento immediately filed a “Motion to Release on Recognizance or in the Alternative Set a Reasonable Bond.” After filing the motion, Ms. Vento scheduled the motion to be heard on January 8, 2024. On that date, the State Attorney’s Office offered 60 days for the violation of probation. The client had paid all the financial obligations and only had the positive urine screen violation left. After negotiating with Judge Vaccaro, Ms. Vento was able to have the client plead no contest to violating probation for a 21 day jail sentence with credit for 10 days served. The client ended up being released from jail on the day the Violation of Probation arraignment was originally scheduled.

Our client was originally arrested for Battery and Domestic Battery by Strangulation on March 8, 2024, in Hillsborough County. Ms. Vento contacted the State Attorney’s Office in Hillsborough County shortly after the arrest. In communicating with the State, Ms. Vento realized there were discrepancies between what was reported to law enforcement, what was told to the prosecutor, and what the alleged victim was saying on social media. Ms. Vento provided the prosecutor with copies of the alleged victim’s social media statements, proving the discrepancies. The State elected not to file formal charges against the client on March 27, 2024, allowing our client to move on with his life free of any domestic violence or felony charges.

May 7, 2009 – State v. C.H. – Habitual traffic offender’s Motion to vacate DWLS without knowledge granted in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida, which will cause the client’s driver license to become valid after the habitual traffic offender revocation is removed.

May 7, 2009 – State v. L.A. – Motion to vacate DWLS without knowledge granted in Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL, which will cause the habitual traffic offender status to be removed.

Felony DWLSR Reduced to No Valid Driver’s License

On September 7, 2016, in Division A, before the Honorable Lisa D. Campbell, judge of the Criminal Court of Hillsborough County, Florida, our client’s Felony DWLSR charge under F.S. 322.34 (2)(c) was reduced to a second-degree misdemeanor for no valid driver’s license. The Our client was originally charged with Felony Driving While License Canceled, Suspended or Revoked (Third Offense). Getting the charges reduced was necessary so that the client would not receive a Five Year HTO Revocation from the Florida DHSMV. The client received a time served disposition with no probation. He left the courtroom and paid $270 in total fees in the case.

18 Month Hard Suspension for Refusal Invalidated – 

On July 7, 2022, a hearing officer in Tampa, FL, invalidated a 18 month hard suspension after a refusal to submit to a breath, blood, or urine test. The suspension was invalidated because the arresting officer with the Tampa Police Department failed to appear at the hearing.

On September 8, 2019, federal agents with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) seized $45,001.00 in U.S. currency from our client’s luggage. We were contacted by a local attorney who took the case initially but wanted to be co-counsel with our law firm on the case.

The client signed an agreement to retain our firm under those terms. After completing our preliminary investigation, talking with the agent that seized the money, and preserving video surveillance of the incident, we filed a verified claim on September 30, 2019.

Our first verified claim letter demanded early judicial intervention (also called “court action”). We also provided additional information about the legality of the seizure and demanded that the case be forwarded to the United States Attorney’s Office to avoid any further delay.

Our first verified claim triggered the Fines, Penalties and Forfeiture Officer with the U.S. Customs and Board Protection to send the Notice of Seizure and Information to Claimants CAFRA Form, the Election of Proceedings CAFRA Form, and the Seized Asset Claim Form to us on October 4, 2019.

In response to those documents, we send a second demand for early judicial intervention (“court action”) on October 31, 2019.

Within 90 days of our first verified claim letter, we received a certified letter from the FP&F Officer. The letter explained: “The determination has been made that $45,001.00 will be remitted.” The check for $45,001.00 arrived on February 7, 2020.

April 6, 2009 – State v. J.S. – County Court Judge in Hillsborough County in Tampa, FL, granted client’s motion to vacate two separate DWLS with knowledge cases, both first degree misdemeanors, in 5792FGL and 9913GEX which has removed the Florida habitual traffic offender revocation.

April 6, 2009 – State v. D.V. – Motion to vacate the conviction for driving while license suspended granted in Okaloosa County, FL, which allowed the client to reverse five year Florida habitual traffic offender suspension imposed by the Florida DMV.

No Arrest or Filed Charges for Lewd & Lascivious Molestation

On June 6, 2016, we were hired to assist a client with a Pre-File Sexual Abuse investigation. In this case, the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office was investigating an allegation of Lewd & Lascivious Molestation. A Detective requested that our client submit to a polygraph examination. In the interim, our firm hired an expert polygraph examiner to conduct our own exam. The results exonerated our client and were submitted to the Detective investigating the case. The information we presented to the Detective, along with the polygraph evidence, resulted in the “No-File” which means that the State Attorney’s Office never filed any formal charges at the recommendation of the Detective). As a result, we were able to prevent our client from ever being arrested because of this false allegation.

Filing Motion to Suppress Drug Charges Results in Charges Being Dropped

On January 6, 2017, in case number 512016MM005XXXA000WS and 512016MM005XXXA000WS before the Honorable Judge Joseph Poblick in County Court at the New Port Richey Courthouse in Pasco County, the prosecutor dropped the charge of Possession of Marijuana Less than an Ounce and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia right before a hearing was scheduled on a motion to suppress evidence based on an illegal search. As a result, all charges against our client were dropped.

Marijuana charges dropped in Tampa

On November 6, 2017, in case number 17-CM-012XXX, pending before the Honorable Judge Lawrence Lefler in Division D in Hillsborough County, the prosecution dropped charges of Possession of Cannabis less than 20 Grams and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.

6 Month DUBAL Suspension Set Aside at Tampa Bar

On October 6, 2020, a hearing officer with the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Reviews issued a final order setting aside a 6 month driver’s license suspension for having an unlawful alcohol level because of “insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear.” The arresting officer was a trooper with the Florida Highway Patrol.

Criminal BUI Amended to Civil Infraction for Careless Boating

Our client was charged with boating under the influence (BUI) in Pasco County, FL, at the West Pasco Judicial Center courthouse in New Port Richey. On August 6, 2021, the prosecutor agreed to amend the criminal charge of BUI to a civil infraction for “careless boating” under Section 327.33(2), F.S. for a case pending before Judge Debra Roberts.

The case was resolved after we filed a motion that alleged:

1. FWC Officer Forest Rothchild had no legal basis to demand that the two men on jet skis “come over” to be detained at the dock located at 926 Marine Pkwy, New Port Richey, FL 34652 (Gulf Harbors Yacht Club).
2. Officer Rothchild, along with FWC Officer Damon J. Pulaski, lacked the necessary reasonable suspicion that Defendant was impaired in order to initiate a BUI investigation or perform the HGN and continue the detention for additional evaluation.
3. The officers conducted HGN incorrectly because the subject’s eyes were too far below the stimulus, the officer only made 4 passes with the stimulus, the stimulus was not held in the correct location or for the correct length of time, and the officer had insufficient training and experience to conduct HGN or evaluate the subject’s performance under the particular circumstances of this case.
4. Miranda warnings were never read.

The court agreed to the negotiated resolution to amend the BUI charge to a civil infraction for careless boating, withhold adjudication, and imposed a civil penalty of $111 with additional costs of $250 after showing proof that our client completed an evaluation and took a boating safety course.

On September 17, 2020, FBI agents seized $24,905.00 in United States Currency from our client at the Luis Munoz Marin International Airport in San Juan, Puerto Rico. According to the receipt, the money was seized for forfeiture pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 881. We filed a verified claim online on January 4, 2021.

The Assistant United States Attorney then waited 92 days to file a Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem. After showing proof to the AUSA that the complaint was filed outside of the 90-day deadline imposed by CAFRA, the FBI agreed to return 100% of the money seized to our office. On May 6, 2021, the AUSA then filed a voluntary dismissal of the complaint with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i).

Keep in mind that you are not required to fill out a FinCEN Form 105 if you bring more than $10,000 cash into or out of Puerto Rico or the Luis Munoz Marin International Airport since it is not classified as “outside of the United States” or “a foreign country” for purposes of the reporting requirements (the same is true for the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and Territory of the Pacific Islands).

Although you can carry over $10,000 cash on a flight to Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands without needing to fill out a FinCEN Form 105, federal agents monitor individuals traveling to those locations more carefully, especially when they are suspected of transporting bulk currency.

On January 6-7, 2025, Attorney Leslie Sammis took a civil asset forfeiture case to trial in federal court before the Honorable Judge Thomas Barber. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) seized $41,805.00 and about $30,000 in gold jewelry. The property was seized in Manatee County during the execution of a search warrant at our client’s home in late 2021. The case was stayed while the criminal charges were pending. The two-day trial happened on Monday and Tuesday. The jury checked all 9 boxes, “No,” which means the government must return all seized property. It was a total and complete victory.

On January 28, 2025, the Court signed an order directing the government to pay the Claimants, through their attorney Leslie Sammis, $44,640.00 in attorney’s fees, $41.40 in copy costs, $5,031.47 in pre-judgment interest, and post-judgment interest. The U.S.A. was required to pay all the Claimant’s reasonable attorney fees, which is mandatory under the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 (CAFRA). The mandatory attorney fees provisions are intended to discourage overzealous Government actions in forfeiture cases.

Court Dismisses RPO Filed by Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office – On June 6, 2022, a Circuit Judge in Pinellas County denied the petition for a Risk Protection Order filed by the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office after an evidentiary hearing with witness testimony on June 3, 2022.

Habitual Traffic Offender Designation Removed DWLSR Reduced to No Valid Driver’s License. Our client faced a Driving While License Suspended charge and Habitual Traffic Offender designation. Her license was suspended for five years. We filed a Motion to lift the HTO status, allowing our client to obtain her license. On February 6, 2023, our client’s DWLSR charge under F.S. 322.34 (2)(c) was reduced to a second-degree misdemeanor for no valid driver’s license so that she could avoid another five-year HTO revocation. The client received a time-served disposition with no probation and keep her driver’s license valid.

Felony False Imprisonment and DV Battery Charges Dropped in Tampa

On December 5, 2017, in case number 17-CF-011XXX, pending before the Honorable Judge Vivian T. Corvo in Felony Division G in Hillsborough County, the prosecutor dropped charges of False Imprisonment and Domestic Violence Battery.

Our client discovered a DUI incorrectly listed on her driving record for over 20 years due to a friend’s arrest under her name. We gathered court-certified documents to clarify the error, enabling her to have the DUI annotation removed and to restore her driving privileges.

Our client was facing a second DUI charge, with the first DUI occurring over 20 years ago. We presented extensive mitigation to the State, highlighting our client’s lengthy military service. Although the State initially sought jail time, we set the case for trial. One week before trial, the State agreed to reduce the charge to a dry reckless, allowing our client to plead to reckless driving with a $500 fine, avoiding harsher penalties.

On August 5, 2025, the Attorney Hearing Office for the Bureau of Administrative Reviews issued a final order setting aside the suspension of the driving privilege. The order provided:

This case is adjudicated under the authority of Chapter 15A-6, F.A.C., and section 322.2615, F.S. The Hearing Officer has set aside the suspension of your driving privilege dated 28 March 2025 for refusal to submit to a breath, blood or urine test. Upon review of the facts of the case there is not competent, substantial evidence to support the suspension….”

Principal’s Expulsion Recommendation Overturned – On January 5, 2023, a hearing was held with the Pasco School Board to determine if our client should be expelled for a fight on school property. The school’s principal recommended expulsion despite our client not being the initial aggressor in the fight. After hearing testimony from our client and reviewing the video of the incident, the hearing officer elected not to expel our client.

Our client discovered a DUI incorrectly listed on her driving record for over 20 years due to a friend’s arrest under her name. We gathered court-certified documents to clarify the error, enabling her to have the DUI annotation removed and to restore her driving privileges.

Our client was facing a second DUI charge, with the first DUI occurring over 20 years ago. We presented extensive mitigation to the State, highlighting our client’s lengthy military service. Although the State initially sought jail time, we set the case for trial. One week before trial, the State agreed to reduce the charge to a dry reckless, allowing our client to plead to reckless driving with a $500 fine, avoiding harsher penalties.

May 4, 2009 – State v. M.G. – Motion to set aside and vacate plea and conviction granted in Pinellas County, Clearwater, Florida, for 2326GDJ, which caused the DMV to remove the Florida habitual traffic offender revocation causing the driver’s license to become valid.

Battery Charges Dropped in Clearwater, FL

On January 4, 2018, the State Attorney’s Office in Clearwater, FL, dropped the battery charge pending against our client. The charge was dropped when the prosecutor filed a written “Nolle Prosequi”. The charge was dropped after we filed a “Motion to Dismiss Based on Statutory Immunity Pursuant to Section 776.032 (“Stand Your Ground”)”. The battery charge was pending in Pinellas County, FL, before the Honorable Judge Holly Grissinger.

Marijuana Charges Dropped in Tampa, FL

On January 4, 2018, in case number 17-CM-013XXX, pending before the Honorable Judge Miriam Valkenburg in Division A in Hillsborough County, the prosecution dropped charges of Possession of Cannabis less than 20 Grams and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.

Our client was arrested for Felony Possession of Cannabis in 18-CF-013XXX. We presented mitigation to the State Attorney’s Office including a valid medical marijuana card. Based on the mitigation and problems with the way the search was conducted, the State Attorney’s Office filed a Letter of Release and declined to file any formal charges on December 4, 2018. Because no formal charges were filed, our client never had to step foot into a courtroom.

18 Month Hard Suspension for Second Refusal Set Aside 

On August 4, 2020, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews (BAR) in Clearwater, FL, entered a Final Order on Results of Review Hearing.  The order set aside the eighteen (18) month administrative suspension for the second refusal. At the hearing, the breath test operator appeared but the arresting officer did not. As a result, the hearing officer had insufficient evidence to support the conviction.

6 Month DUBAL Suspension Set Aside at Clearwater BAR

On December 4, 2020, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Clearwater BAR invalidated an administrative suspension for driving with an unlawful breath alcohol level. The order provided: “[u]pon review of the facts of the case, the Department Hearing officer has determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension of the petitioner’s driver license due to insufficient documentation submitted to the administrative hearing to establish probable cause of the arrest. (No arresting agency evidence packet).”

Court Finds No Probable Cause for Seizure by Lake County Sheriff’s Office – Leslie Sammis represented two clients (the company that loaded money into an ATM and the bank that supplied the money to the company). In that case, the Lake County Sheriff’s Office seized $42,423,00 in U.S. Currency from one ATM and $89,407 from another ATM. After an Adversarial Preliminary Hearing held on October 4, 2024, the Court reviewed exhibits, watched a video of the seizure, and listened to the testimony of several witnesses. In an order dated October 4, 2024, Circuit Court Judge Dan R. Mosley found that the Lake County Sheriff’s Office had “no probable cause” to seize the currency found in the ATMs. The property was returned to Ms. Sammis’ clients shortly thereafter.

Our client was charged with a felony for providing false information to a pawnbroker. The warrant for her arrest was over three years old. We filed a Motion to Dismiss the Information filed in this case for the State’s failure to commence prosecution of the Defendant within the applicable statute of limitations. On August 4, 2022, the State filed a Nolle Prosse which dismissed the charge.

The petitioner filed an injunction for protection against domestic violence against our client. At the final hearing on September 20, 2022, the petitioner announced she was ready to proceed. After hearing us announce that we were also ready to proceed with a hearing she retracted her statement and asked for another continuance. At the next final injunction hearing on October 4, 2022, the petitioner did not appear and the injunction against our client was dismissed.

On March 4, 2024, our firm was successful in preventing the State Attorney’s Office from filing formal charges against our client who had been arrested for Felony Domestic Battery on a Person Aged 65 or Older. This resolution allowed our client to move forward without the burden of a criminal record.

Resisting without Violence and Trespassing Charges dropped in Tampa

On November 3, 2017, in case number 17-CM-008XXX, pending before the Honorable Judge Eric Myers in Division B in Hillsborough County, the prosecution entered a “Nolle Prosse” (dropped the charges) of “Resisting without Violence” and “Trespassing”. Because our client had no prior record, the State Attorney’s Office offered MIP and refused to drop the case for several months. While MIP can be a positive result for an individual who is willing to state they did something wrong, we believed our client was completely innocent and were not willing to settle for anything less than a Nolle Prosse. We sought leave of court to take depositions to show that our client not only did nothing wrong, but was physically assaulted by law enforcement. We also presented several defense witnesses to the State Attorney’s Office to show that our client was telling the truth about the circumstances of the case. After fighting for months, the State Attorney finally dropped all charges.

6 Month Suspension Invalidated When One BAC Reading was Below .08 

On March 3, 2021, a hearing officer with the Clearwater Bureau of Administrative Reviews entered a final order setting aside a 6-month driver’s license suspension triggered after a DUI arrest by an officer with the St. Petersburg Police Department. The order provided:

“[u]pon a review of the case, there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the breath test result did not comply with Section 316.193(1)(b) F.S. and Rule 11D-8.002(12) in that the petitioner provided two breath samples, one of which the result was under .08g/210L.”

Although officers might trigger an administrative suspension when one BAC reading is above the legal limit and one BAC reading is below the legal limit, the hearing officer will invalidate the suspension if you request a formal review hearing and make a motion to invalidate the suspension based on a lack of evidence.

On 3/3/22, we received an email and letter from SAMANTHA J GAROFALO for Amelia Castelli, Director, Fines, Penalties and Forfeitures, Office of Field Operations, CBP, Miami, FL, in response to a verified claim we served on CBP on 11/5/21. The letter indicated that more than $10,000 in U.S. Currency seized at the Fort Lauderdale International Airport on September 09, 2021, by an agent with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would be released to us via a check. CBP agreed to refund 100% of the money seized after the Assistant United States Attorney decided not to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court to litigate the forfeiture issue.

On August 3, 2020, the State Attorney’s Office in Sarasota County, Florida, filed a Nolle Prosequi which dropped the charge. The client was charged with Domestic Violence Battery. Prior to the SAO dropping charges, we presented mitigation showing problems with the way the arresting officer handled the investigation and credibility issues on the part of the complaining witness.

Our client faced a 5-year Driver’s License revocation after she paid three citations for unknowingly driving with a suspended license within a 5-year period. We filed a Motion to Vacate the guilty adjudication on the most recent citation. On February 3, 2023, our motion was granted, which allowed our client to regain her regular driving privileges.

Our client was arrested on two counts of child abuse. Before charges were even filed, we successfully negotiated with the Assistant State Attorney to have the charges completely dropped if he participated in a parenting course, which he did, and on February 3, 2022, the Assistant State Attorney filed formal documents dropping all charges.

Our client was arrested at his home in Hillsborough County, FL, on an out-of-state fugitive warrant on October 28, 2024. We were retained the next day, right before the 1:30 p.m. first appearance hearing. Although most people are held in jail with “no bond” while awaiting extradition, we convinced the court that an extradition bond was appropriate. We also argued that the criminal report affidavit (CRA) lacked probable cause because it contained no description of any facts explaining why our client was the same person identified in the out-of-state warrant. Nothing in the CRA disclosed what the out-of-state charges were or when they were allegedly committed. That day, the court agreed to ROR our client with a private GPS monitor and asked us to return to court in two days when more information might be available. During that time, we contacted the out-of-state prosecutor and got them to agree that our client could “self-surrender” the following week. When we returned to court in Hillsborough County on October 31, 2024, the state had no objection to that arrangement. On November 1, 2024, the Honorable J. Logan Murphy entered an “Order of Release,” which provided:

Because the information necessary to place conditions of release on Defendant …. after examination in this fugitive case has not been presented to the Court, Defendant …shall be RELEASED and all conditions of release (including a private GPS and any restrictions on travel) shall be LIFTED. ss. 941.13, 941.14, 941.15, Fla. Stat. (2024); France v. Judd, 932 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).

This order does not dismiss this fugitive case, which shall remain open. The Court will enter a more detailed order addressing all of [Defendant’s] pending charges and the future progress of this case. See Carterv. Coleman, 443 So. 2d 491, 493 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (“[A] discharge from bond or custody does not mean dismissal of all extradition proceedings.”).

On November 3, the court entered a more detailed order of release that dismissed the case entirely. Read the order here: Order Dismissing Fugitive Warrant.›

April 2, 2009 – State. v. A.G. – Motion to vacate driving while license suspended case granted in Starke, Bradford County, Florida, citation 8831GET, which lifted client’s 30 days suspension for excessive points.

Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon Charge No Filed in Tampa

On May 2, 2018, the State Attorney’s Office in Hillsborough County elected to not file any charges against our client after we presented information to them to show that our client was actually the victim in this case and should never be prosecuted. This was a situation where our client was not arrested. However, an investigation was conducted and the State Attorney’s Office had the file in their Intake division. We wrote a very compelling letter to the Intake Department and spoke with the State at length prior to their intake appointment with the “victim” and attached CAD calls, photos, and additional evidence to show that the real victim was our client. No case number was ever created as we caught this case so early on and prevented our client from ever being arrested and having a mugshot out there, and never having to step foot in a courtroom.

HTO Reversed in Pasco County

Our client was informed he was habitualized as a traffic offender resulting in a loss of driving privileges for five years. This was done as the Pasco County clerk inadvertently added a DWLS to his record 14 years late. We filed a Motion to Vacate the conviction. Judge Vandercar in Dade City, Florida, granted the motion in 2004CT020XXX, and on August 2, 2018, over State’s objection our client was able to enter a plea to the reduced charge of NVDL thereby allowing him to get his Driver License reinstated.

12 Month Refusal Suspension Set Aside

On March 2, 2021, a HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Reviews issued a final order setting aside a 12 month suspension for refusing to submit to a breath test. The order provides: “the Department Hearing Officer has determined that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear.”

In September of 2020, officers with the Brevard County Sheriff’s Office and agents with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized $40,253 in U.S. Currency discovered during a routine traffic stop and arrest on an outstanding warrant. After preserving video and audio from the roadside investigation and at the police station, we filed a verified claim for court action on October 20, 2020, which triggered the 90 day deadline for the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court. Instead of filing the complaint, on February 2, 2021, we received a letter from CBP that indicated: “After a review of the matter, the Government has decided to release the property to you.”

On November 2, 2023, the Honorable Michael Robinson, a Circuit Court Judge in Broward County, signed an order finding “no probable cause” for the seizure and forfeiture of a 2020 Dodge Challenger after an adversarial hearing held on October 30, 2023. The order required the agency to return the vehicle to our client within five (5) business days. Additionally, the order found that since there was no probable cause, the Hollywood Police Department, pursuant to Section 932.704(10), was ordered to reimburse the client for the reasonable attorney fees paid to our firm.

Resisting Officer Without Violence and Domestic Battery Charges in Polk County Dropped – Our client was charged with Resisting Officer Without Violence and Domestic Battery. On August 02, 2022, at the scheduled Jury Trial hearing date, the State announced a Nolle Prosse which dismissed the charges.

December 1, 2009 – The State Attorney’s Office in Hillsborough County dropped all charges in case number CT-001621-FWX for driving while license suspended as a habitual traffic offender (ultimately charged as a misdemeanor) before Judge Lawrence Lefler. The charges were dropped on the day of a hearing on a motion to suppress. In the motion to suppress we showed that the officer did not have a good reason for stopping the vehicle just because of a complaint from a concerned citizen about a suspicious vehicle parked in front of a vacant home. A few months prior to the hearing we were able to vacate one of the underlying offenses that caused the Habitual Traffic Offender status. On the day of the hearing, the client had his full driving privileges and a valid driver’s license. The fact that this charge was dismissed entirely allowed the client to avoid another five year HTO revocation.

February 1, 2010 – A.S. v. State of Florida – 2009 CT 012037 – We filed a Motion to Withdraw Plea. The State ultimately agreed that our client had been misadvised by his privately retained attorney about the consequence his plea to driving while license suspended with knowledge (a criminal misdemeanor offense) would have on his driver’s license. After client entered the plea he learned he was declared a habitual traffic offender. We were able to withdraw the plea and then convince the prosecutor to reduce the charge to “no valid” driver’s license which would not cause another HTO revocation.

Marijuana Charge Dropped Before Trial

On July 1, 2016, in case number 16-CM-005XXX, we filed a motion to dismissed a marijuana possession charge based on insufficient evidence of constructive possession. Before the hearing, the state decided to drop the charges instead of going forward on the motion pending before the Honorable Judge Margaret Taylor in Hillsborough County, Tampa, FL.

On another case decided on March 1, 2023, our firm conducted a Formal Reviewing to challenge the suspension of our client’s license based on her refusal to submit to a breath, blood, or urine test. The Hearing Officer determined insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear.

On March 1, 2023, our client’s License Suspension was set aside after a Formal Review Hearing. The Arresting Officer failed to provide the DUI Evidentiary Packet before the Hearing. Therefore, the Hearing Officer determined insufficient evidence to support our client’s license suspension.

On May 1, 2023, we attended a hearing on a motion to dismiss an injunction for protection against domestic violence pending in Pinellas County, FL. We represented the respondent who filed the motion. After questioning the petitioner, the court found a change in circumstances and granted our request to dismiss the injunction since the petition was not in immediate and present danger of domestic violence.

Our client came to us after receiving notice that his license would be revoked due to paying off 3 Driving While License Suspended citations within a 5-year period, which triggered a license suspension for 5 years as a Habitual Traffic Offender. We filed a Motion to Vacate the Driving While License Suspended conviction and reverse the HTO suspension. On March 1, 2024, the court granted our attorney’s motion without a hearing, which reversed our client’s HTO Status. Our client can now drive on a valid license with minimal disruption to his day-to-day life.

Feburary 24, 2009 – State v. G.B. – Motion to vacate or set aside conviction for driving while license suspended without knowledge, a civil citation 9334FYP, was granted at theTraffic Court Division, Floriland Business Center, in Tampa, Florida. Our client was able to reverse the fact his driver license was revoked as a Florida habitual traffic offender (HTO).

Sale of Marijuana More than 20 Grams within 1,000 Feet

Prosecutor with the State Attorney’s Office for Pasco County in the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida filed a “No Information” which dropped all charges against our client including sale of marijuana more than 20 grams within 1000 feet of a convenience store, and possession of marijuana more than 20 grams within 1000 feet of a convenience store. In order to assist the prosecutor in making a filing decision, we provided information showing that our client had been set up by a confidential informant who used questionable tactics to coerce our client into assisting him with delivering marijuana to an undercover police officer during a sting operation. We alleged that the confidential information coerced our clients into assisting him which resulted in both an entrapment and a necessity defense. The State Attorney’s Office filed a “No Information” which stated the prosecutor’s conclusion that “the facts and circumstances revealed do not warrant prosecution at this time.”

Motion to Suppress Hearing in a Marijuana Case

Winning a motion to suppress hearing in a possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia case (originally arrested for felony cultivation of cannabis) resulted in dismissal of all charges before Judge John N. Conrad, in Tampa. In this case law enforcement officers in Hillsborough County, Florida, receive a tip about the cultivation of marijuana and went to the property without a warrant. We argued in the motion that the officers did not have free and voluntary consent to go onto our client’s property or into the house. We alleged that the officers used coercive and illegal tactics to gain “consent.”

Motions Filed in Marijuana Case

Filing a motion to suppress, motion to dismiss, and notice of expiration of speedy trial resulted in State dropping all charges on the day of jury selection for Possession of Marijuana (originally arrested for felony intent to sell) and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia in case 2009-MM-017082 before Judge Lawrence M. Lefler, Tampa.

Charges Dismissed in Cultivation of Marijuana Case

All charges were dismissed after we won a motion to suppress hearing before a Circuit Court Judge in Tampa, Hillsborough County, FL. Our client was formally charged with manufacture of cannabis, possession of cannabis (less than 20 grams), possession of a controlled substance (Soma), and possession of drug paraphernalia. The issue in the case was whether the marijuana task force violated our client’s rights during a “knock and talk” investigation at his home. The officer’s alleged that they had permission to enter the home, observed marijuana in plain view, and then conducted a search finding a grow house operation. We moved to suppress the 16 marijuana plants, Soma (a prescription medication and controlled substance), drug paraphernalia, light system, ballasts, and other marijuana hydroponic grow house equipment. After the court suppressed the evidence, the court then granted our motion to dismiss all charges.

Charges Dropped in Possession of Controlled Substance Case

All charges for felony possession of cocaine, possession of cannabis less than 20 grams, and possession of drug paraphernalia in case number 05-CF-023561 were dismissed by a Circuit Court Judge after the court granted our motion to suppress. The case involved law enforcement officers in Hillsborough County who entered our client’s home to execute an arrest warrant. Although the officers alleged that they had consent to enter, we were able to show problems with that testimony during depositions. We then filed a motion to suppress the evidence based on the unlawful entry. At the scheduled motion hearing the prosecutor stood silent and did not oppose the motion. Our client was able to walk out of the courtroom after all charges were dismissed.

Charges Dropped in Polk County Drug Case

In MM11-206BA, our client was charged with possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia after an arrest by Deputy Dina Rodriguez and Deputy Paul Wright in Polk County, FL. The officers alleged smelling marijuana during the traffic stop and used a canine (K9) drug dog to sniff for narcotics detection. Because of prior allegation of marijuana charges the offer was an adjudication (which comes with a two year driver’s license revocation and is considered a “drug conviction” with implications for Federal Financial Aid and public housing). Additionally, because the case was in Polk County the prosecutor wanted 90 days in jail for this first degree misdemeanor charge. We developed a defense centered around the fact that our client did not know that the drugs were in the vehicle and the alleged admissions were coerced. On the day of jury selection for the possession of marijuana case in front of Judge Barry Bennett in Polk County the prosecutor dropped all charges (terminated and dismissed) by announcing a “nolle prosse” in open court.

Motions Filed in Marijuana Case

In another case scheduled for a suppression hearing before the Honorable Eric R. Myers (11-CM-021538), our client was charged with possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. We filed a motion to suppress alleging that the stop was unlawful because our client’s tag was not obscured and no other legal basis existed for the stop. Instead of going forward with the hearing, the prosecutor with the State Attorney’s Office announced a “nol pross.”

Motions Filed in Drug Case

Our client was charged with possession of cannabis less than 20 grams under Florida Statute 893.13 (11-CM-019953). We filed a motion to suppress which alleged that the officer did not have an adequate basis to approached the parked vehicle and detain the occupants and conduct a search of the vehicle. On the day of the scheduled motion hearing before the Honorable Eric R. Myers, Court Court Judge in Hillsborough County, the State announced a “nol pross” instead of going forward with the suppression hearing.

Drug Trafficking Charges with a 25 Year Min/Man Dismissed

Winning a contested motion to suppress hearing in which two detectives testified saved our client a 25 year minimum mandatory prison sentence in 2009-CF-011782 before Judge Denise A. Pomponio. After the hearing, the court dismissed all charges including a first-degree felony charge of DRUG TRAFFICKING and a felony charge of resisting a law enforcement officer with violence in Tampa, Florida.

On May 14th, 2020, a HSMV Hearing Officer at the Tampa Bureau of Administrative Review issued an order setting aside a CDL disqualification dated April 4, 2020, and a suspension dated April 4, 2020, for driving with an unlawful alcohol level because “there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension and disqualification…”

On July 28th, 2020, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews (BAR) in Tampa, entered a final order setting aside the suspension for having an unlawful alcohol level. The hearing officer determined that there was insufficient evidence to suppose the suspension because the arresting officer failed to appear. A copy of the order was furnished to the Florida Highway Patrol.

Twelve (12) Month Refusal Suspension Set Aside

On July 19th, 2021, the HSMV Field Hearing Officer at the Bureau of Administrative Reviews entered an order setting aside the suspension for refusal. The case involved a DUI arrest by an officer with Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission. The hearing officer determined “that there is insufficient evidence to support the suspension because the DUI evidentiary packet was not received.”

In a Final Order on Results of Review Hearing, a HSMV Field Hearing in the Bureau of Administrative Review office in Clearwater, FL, set aside a suspension for refusal to submit to a breath, blood, or urine test because the probable cause affidavit was not attested by the arresting officer with the Manatee County Sheriff’s Office.

Our client’s Binance account was “frozen as it is currently under investigation by law enforcement.” We contacted the Special Agent with the Cyber Group of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) assigned to the case. The AUSA obtained a seizure warrant but agreed to hold it pending negotiations.

Our client was accused of being an intermediary or a broker of funds stolen from victims of a liquidity mining pool scam in California. We requested a copy of the seizure warrant, supporting affidavit, and account records obtained from Binance. We presented several arguments for why the seizure warrant should be withdrawn, including:

• the U.S. District Court had no jurisdiction over the cryptocurrency funds seized for civil asset forfeiture;
• any accusation that Peer to Peer (P2P) trades constitute a “money transmitting business” was unjustified;
• the fraudulently obtained cryptocurrency was only in our client’s wallet for a short time, so the funds later frozen by Binance were not connected; and
• our client qualified as a “bona fide purchaser” who had no cause to believe that the property was subject to forfeiture.

Shortly thereafter, the AUSA thanked us for providing additional information and indicated that although they believed fraud proceeds were deposited into our client’s wallet, upon further review of our client’s transaction history and the arguments presented, they agreed to withdraw the seizure warrant by seeking the appropriate order from the issuing magistrate and promptly communicating any withdrawal order to Binance.

DEA seized over $30,000 worth of U.S. Dollar Tether (USDT) and Bitcoin. After receiving a “notice of seizure,” we filed a verified claim for court action. The AUSA filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court but then agreed to return the property before an answer became due. We entered a memorandum of agreement that ALL of the client’s cryptocurrency would be returned to the client’s wallet within fourteen (14) days. The funds were returned in April of 2023.

In October of 2021, The Honorable Michelle Pincket, Circuit Court Judge in Polk County, FL, denied a Petition for a Final Risk Protection Order requested by the Winter Haven Police Department. The Court considered the petition, testimony of two witnesses, record, and applicable law. In the order, the Court noted that it “does not find by clear and convincing evidence that the Respondent poses a significant danger of causing personal injury to himself or herself or others by having in his or her custody or control, or by purchasing, possessing, or receiving, a firearm or any ammunition.”

Our client contacted us when his girlfriend at the time accused him of battering her. Our attorney contacted the intake attorney at the State Attorney’s Office and provided additional information showing that our client’s girlfriend was actually the initially aggressor and battered him. Our client acted in self-defense. After reviewing the information we provided, the State Attorney filed a Letter of Non-Prosecution stating that they decided not to file battery charges against our client.

Our client was charged with Boating Under the Influence after being arrested for allegedly operating a boat while under the influence of cannabis. Upon receiving urinalysis results showing only the presence of a metabolite of THC, our office presented the State with a Motion to Dismiss the charge based on the State’s inability to prove that our client was under the influence at the time he was operating the boat. Upon reviewing the motion, the State agreed to reduce the charge to Careless Operation of a Vessel, which is a non-criminal civil citation.

Our client came to us two years after having a 10-year permanent injunction granted against her. Although the petitioner initially objected to dissolving the injunction, The Honorable Judge Alicia Polk permitted us to refile the motion after gathering additional mitigation to support our position. Upon returning to court with additional mitigation, Judge Polk granted the Motion to Dissolve the injunction.

The client was arrested on January 3, 2024, for Battery Domestic Violence under Florida Statute 784.03(1)(A)(1) in Hillsborough County. Ms. Vento made contact with the alleged victim, who initially indicated she did not want to proceed with charges before cutting off any communication. Ms. Vento made contact with the State Attorney’s Office, raising concerns of potential mischaracterization of the events that occurred prior to an arrest being made and a note that was left in the Client’s belongings when they retrieved their items from the mutual home. As a result, the State proceeded to not file formal charged against the Client.