Lame - User contributions [en]

Am I Eligible for a Pretrial Diversion?

2012-05-09T20:57:03Z

Magicmichael2: Created page with " There are several terms for what is named a "pretrial diversion" or "deferred prosecution" agreement. It can be referred to by different terms in different jurisdictions. ..."

There are several terms for what is named a "pretrial diversion" or "deferred prosecution" agreement. It can be referred to by different terms in different jurisdictions. To provide an example, in North Carolina, a drug diversion is also known as the "90-96 program." In Broward County, it is most often referred to as a "diversion" or a "deferral."

A deferred prosecution allows the accused to admit guilt or enter a plea of no contest. The plea is then put on hold while the defendant completes the terms of the diversion agreement. The diversion usually consists of several hours of community service, drug testing and any types of conditions which are deemed appropriate based on the offense. In that sense, the terms of a diversion are pretty flexible.

It is important to note that a diversion is offered through the Office of The State Attorney. The Judge will not have the authority to force the State into offering a defendant a diversion. To that extent, whether a defendant qualifies for a diversion is based on the policies and procedures written by the Office of the State Attorney. There are specific policies which might be general guidelines and there are specific policies that seem like hard and fast rules. In Florida, office policies vary by circuit.

Being a defendant in a criminal case is extremely stressful. Nearly all people are extremely anxious to have their attorney attack the State's case from the very beginning. However, it is not at all times the best strategy to do so. If your attorney determines that you would possibly be eligible to get a diversion, your attorney may not initially ask for discovery or, for that matter, do anything in your case. Different State Attorney's Offices have different guidelines. Some offices have a policy of not offering a diversion to someone who's requested discovery in his or her case. The rationale isn't that requesting discovery is a punishment, but rather the diversion offer is a reward for accepting responsibility in a timely fashion. In case you are considering a diversion, your attorney would be able to best tell you what an appropriate strategy would be.

The Law Offices of Michael A. Dye, P.A. is a [http://alcoholanddruglaw.com Broward County Criminal Defense] law firm located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Mr. Dye has extensive experience representing individuals charged with DUI and other serious criminal offenses. For more information, please call (954)745-5848 or visit [http://alcoholanddruglaw.com http://AlcoholAndDrugLaw.com].

The Legality of DUI Checkpoints by Broward County DUI Attorney, Michael A. Dye

2012-05-02T00:24:47Z

Magicmichael2: Created page with "DUI Checkpoints are a controversial approach to enforcing DUI laws. While many individuals consider these random warrantless stops offensive, most consider DUI checkpoints to..."

DUI Checkpoints are a controversial approach to enforcing DUI laws. While many individuals consider these random warrantless stops offensive, most consider DUI checkpoints to be a legal method of enforcing the law. What many people don't understand is that DUI checkpoints must meet an extensive amount of criteria to be able to be considered constitutional. If a checkpoint isn't conducted in a constitutional manner, all evidence from the DUI checkpoint can be suppressed.

This is a short description of the issues that are present in checkpoint cases. It is simple to see that this can be an especially complicated area of law, but a knowledgeable DUI defense attorney with experience litigating checkpoint issues can get some great results.

Pursuant to the United States Constitution, a search or seizure is unreasonable in the absence of individualized suspicion of wrongdoing subject to certain limited and well defined exceptions. A police checkpoint for the purposes of a license and registration check and/or perhaps a sobriety checkpoint can be constitutional dependent upon the way in which the checkpoint is setup and conducted. When considering a challenge to a checkpoint, the reviewing court must undertake a two-part inquiry to determine whether the checkpoint meets constitutional requirements: (1) court must first determine the primary programmatic purpose of the checkpoint program; and (2) once a legitimate primary programmatic purpose is determined, the court must also analyze whether the checkpoint was reasonable by weighing the public's interest in the checkpoint against the intrusion on the defendant's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments privacy interests.

The Court must examine all available evidence to see the primary purpose of a checkpoint. The United States Supreme Court has stated that a trial court may not simply accept the State's invocation of a suitable purpose, but must carry out a detailed review of the scheme at issue. See Ferguson v. City of Charleston, 532 U.S. 67, 81, 121 S.Ct. 1281, 1290, 149 L.Ed.2d 205, 218(2001).

The Court's inquiry doesn't end with the finding of a permissible purpose. If a suitable programmatic purpose is found, the Court must determine that the checkpoint was conducted in a reasonable manner. The checkpoint has to be judged on the basis of the individual circumstances. See Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419, 427, 124 S.Ct. 885, 890, 157 L.Ed.2d 843, 852(2004).

There is a three part test to see the reasonableness of a checkpoint. See Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47, 50, 99 S.Ct. 2637, 2640, 61 L.Ed.2d 357, 361(1979). The court must look to "(1) the gravity of the public concerns served by the seizure, (2) the degree to which the seizure advances the public interest, and (3) the severity of the interference with individual liberty." Lidster, 540 U.S. at 427, 124 S.Ct. at 890, 157 L.Ed.2d at 852 quoting Brown, 443 U.S. at 51, 99 S.Ct. At 2640, 61 L.Ed.2d at 362. The next element of a reasonable checkpoint requires that the police narrowly tailor the checkpoint to serve the primary programmatic purpose. See Lidster at 427. Without tailoring, "it is possible that a roadblock purportedly established to check licenses could be located and conducted in such a way as to facilitate the detection of crimes unrelated to licensing." See LaFarve § 10.8(a), at 347-48.

The Law Offices of Michael A. Dye is located in downtown Fort Lauderdale, FL. Michael Dye is a [http://alcoholanddruglaw.com/attorneyprofile.html DUI Defense Attorney]. For more information, please call (954)745-5848 or visit [http://alcoholanddruglaw.com http://AlcoholAndDrugLaw.com]

Defense Prospective on Sex Offender Registration

2012-04-25T00:05:26Z

Magicmichael2: Created page with " With the high rise in the number of sex offenders who are also repeated offenders the federal government decided to impose laws requiring all convicted sexual offenders to re..."

With the high rise in the number of sex offenders who are also repeated offenders the federal government decided to impose laws requiring all convicted sexual offenders to register with the states where they live. Although this measure is controversial, government officials are claiming that it is definitely an increasingly effective method of avoiding re-offending in a number of the most serious criminals. Is this an invasion of privacy that the states and politicians have imposed upon someone who has served their sentence, or is this a legitimate measure of control for some of society's most dangerous offenders?

Someday in time, it became acceptable for the government to trace former criminals; in requiring them to register as an offender, they are essentially tracking the criminal. They are doing nothing more than monitor closely their whereabouts, actions, friends, lifestyle, etc. How this came to be is kind of scary, while it has occurred for a criminal offense that fits the punishment, after all our kids must be protected. It also comes with a price. Most people see this as an intense invasion of privacy and human rights, and in Europe under the banner of the European Convention on Human Rights, such procedures would almost by no means be allowed.

Since beginning this and requiring that all sexual offenders register with their respective states, it opens the door for criminals of other crimes to be required to register. Once that occurs, it allows the governments to begin requiring slowly that everybody be registered for one reason or another. Is this something that the people are willing to let happen? Should the federal government have full knowledge and control over where you go, who your friends are and where you work?

Many feel the laws for sexual offenders aren't stiff enough; they call for stricter punishments and heavier penalties for these most despicable of criminals. This comes from the side of people who wish to seek nothing greater than revenge. At the same time, if someone commits a crime whom is sent for mental help, rather then jail they are not required to register. Their offenses are recorded differently, and their punishment is far easier.

[http://alcoholanddruglaw.com The Law Offices of Michael A. Dye, P.A.] has significant experience handling serious criminal offenses in Broward County, Florida. For more information, please call (954)745-5848 or visit [http://AlcoholAndDrugLaw.com http://AlcoholAndDrugLaw.com]

Florida Violation of Probation Procedure

2012-04-22T03:03:51Z

Magicmichael2: Created page with "A violation of probation hearing is handled much differently than a substantive criminal charge. Both the procedure and standard of proof are far different in violation of pr..."

A violation of probation hearing is handled much differently than a substantive criminal charge. Both the procedure and standard of proof are far different in violation of probation hearings. In order to grasp the difference between criminal trials and violation of probation hearings, it is important to know what exactly probation is.

A defendant doesn't have a right to get put on probation. Rather, probation can be described as being a "state of grace" from the court as an alternative to incarceration. Probation allows someone, who would otherwise be incarcerated, the chance to avoid incarceration contingent on complying with rules set forth by the court. The rules usually are fairly simple. Typical rules usually include, not committing any new criminal offense, show up to your appointments with your probation officer, paying court costs, paying restitution and passing random drug and/or alcohol tests.

If an individual is not in compliance with all the terms of probation, the probation officer can file a violation report. The probation officer may arrest the person on the spot, obtain an arrest warrant or simply provide the defendant with a copy of the violation report along with a court date. The officer's decision on how to proceed is based on office policy as to the type of violation and the officer's discretion.

The alleged violation of probation will go back in front of the original sentencing judge absent extraordinary circumstances. It is very important understand the procedural differences between probation violations and substantive criminal offenses. Despite the fact that there is no right to be on probation, the State must still afford the accused due process to revoke or modify the terms of the defendants probation. Due process for purposes of a violation of probation hearing consists of notice of the allegations against the accused and a meaningful opportunity to be heard regarding the allegations.

Other salient differences and the reasoning behind the differences are as follows. The United States Constitution provides for a Defendant's right to a speedy trial. However, the right to a speedy trial only applies to a substantive criminal offense. Likewise, the United States Constitution provides for a Defendant's right to a trial by jury. However, the right to a trial by jury only applies to a substantive criminal offense. Although there isn't a right to a speedy violation of probation hearing, the hearings do are usually handled in an expedited manner. Due to the expeditious manner in which the hearings are held, discovery rights are limited.

Probably the most vital difference between substantive criminal charges and violation of probation hearings is the standard of proof required revoke probation versus convict on a criminal charge. The United States Constitution provides that a person can only be found guilty if the State can prove the individuals guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Due to the fact that a violation of probation hearing is not a criminal offense, the standard of proof required to revoke probation is significantly lower than what is necessary to obtain a criminal conviction. Many ways are used to express the standard of proof required to find a person responsible for the probation violation. One is "enough evidence to satisfy the conscious of the court." Another, more simple, way that it is expressed is "by the preponderance of the evidence." Quite simply, if the Judge believes that the defendant committed the violation of probation, the defendant will be found responsible for the violation.

Under Florida Law, once a person is found responsible for a violation of probation, all the sentencing options are opened back up. The Judge has the authority to revoke probation and order the defendant be incarcerated, modify the terms of probation or terminate the probation. The decision is in the Judge's discretion and the Judge will bear in mind the defendant's prior criminal record along with the nature of the violation.
The Law Offices of Michael A. Dye, P.A. is a criminal defense law firm located in Fort Lauderdale, Broward County Floirda. Mr. Dye has significant experience defending individuals in [http://alcoholanddruglaw.com/vop.html violation of probation hearings] in both Broward County and other jurisdictions. For more information, please call (954)745-5848 or visit [http://alcoholanddruglaw.com/vop.html http://AlcoholAndDrugLaw.com],