Source: https://defensehelp.typepad.com/russo_russo_pinellas_crim/search-and-seizure/
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 01:06:35+00:00

Document:
This month, Governor Rick Scott signed House Bill 477 imposing new minimum mandatory prison sentences on individuals convicted of trafficking in Fentanyl or Carfentanil. See: Drug Trafficking in Florida... A Crime You Thought You Understood. Unsurprisingly, this legislation was passed after the governor had designated Florida's opioid epidemic as a statewide emergency earlier this year.
As the image depicts, Fentanyl and Carfentanil are highly concentrated drugs that require a substantially less quantity to induce similar effects as herion.
Record Pinellas Oxycodone Prosecutions – How Did We Get Here?
Florida drug trafficking laws are written in such a way that if an individual is simply in possession of a threshold amount of a controlled substance it is considered a "trafficking" offense, regardless if he has never participated in the manufacturing or selling of the drug. Further, the total weight calculation is not based solely on the amount of Fentanyl or Carfentanil that the individual may possess. Rather, Florida law considers the entire "mixture" of substances contained in the pills. This means that if 1 gram of Fentanyl is cut with 3 grams of cocaine or Aspirin, the accused would be still subject to the 3 year minimum mandatory prison sentence under the Law.
Your prescription medication addiction may have originated by an initial, lawful prescription provided to you by your physician.
The lawyers in our office are former state prosecutors and are highly experienced in defending drug trafficking charges. You should contact our office to schedule a free initial consultation. At this meeting we can discuss the possibility of challenging the admissibility of the State's evidence. Let us examine an entrapment defense and consider the role that a confidential informant may have played in your arrest. We can discuss the facts of your case and ascertain whether your charge may be a good candidate for an amendment to a "simple possession offense." We can also determine your eligibility to participate in the Pinellas County Drug Court.
If you are arrested for the offense of trafficking in Fentanyl in the Clearwater or St. Petersburg area you should contact an experienced Pinellas County criminal defense attorney. We are former state prosecutors that can help.
This month the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office purchased a Coherent Inc. TracER™ Laser System for their Forensic Sciences Division. This luminescence device is an 8watt 532nm high performance portable system that will be used at crime scenes to locate trace evidence of fingerprints, skin, body fluids, fibers bone fragments and even narcotics residue. The Tracer Laser System is said to provide law enforcement with an unprecedented level of investigative examination. The intensity of the laser is such that it can locate evidence that could previously go undetected.
How Does the TracER™ Laser System Work?
The instrument weighs under 45 pounds, has an instant on/off capability and operates on AC current in a laboratory setting. However, it also has its own built in battery power supply. This enables the TracER™ to be portable at crime scenes for up to 90 minutes. The battery is capable of recharging through a vehicle’s cigarette lighter. Lasers are considered the optimum light source for non-destructive latent evidence detection. Blocking filters, goggles, a fifteen-foot flexible fiber optic cable and a built-in camera combine to create “spectral brightness” to uncover and to image capture trace evidence. The manufacture promotes the machine by saying that CSI technicians will be able to see more at a crime scenes in less time.
What Other Types of Evidence the Laser Can Uncover?
How Can a Laser Impact my Pinellas Criminal Case?
Attorneys Marc Pelletier and Timothy Sullivan are former State Prosecutors. Their background and experience can be used to evaluate the police practices employed in your case. They can also point to the failure of law enforcement to take steps that would be considered prudent in an otherwise thorough investigation. These Pinellas County defense attorneys are highly dedicated to leaving “no stone unturned” in the meticulous review and preparation of their clients’ cases.
Contact our office to discuss your options!
Attorney Tim Sullivan Honored as "Super Lawyer Rising Star"
Is a Private Attorney Better Than a Public Defender?
The National Institute on Drug Abuse has recently released a report that includes findings from the Florida Medical Examiner’s Commission. Both the federal and state agencies are observing a steady decline in deaths associated with prescription opiate pain pills, oxycodone and oxycontin. However, the report finds that Florida’s pain pill crackdown has resulted in the unintended consequence of an enormous increase in the importation of Mexican white heroin. The National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported that the number of persons using heroin in 2012 doubled since 2007. In Pinellas County, Operation PAR projected that in 2014, admissions to their treatment center for heroin addiction will be three times the number of their patients in 2012.
Government reports and media headlines of this nature have grabbed the attention of local law enforcement agencies in the Clearwater / St. Petersburg area. The spotlight on heroin has likewise been further illuminated because of an 89% increase in heroin related fatalities in 2012. The statistics for 2013 are scheduled to be released any day by the Florida Medical Examiner’s Commission. There is a general consensus to expect a further escalation because. The latest “Hot Spots” for heroin have developed beyond South Florida into the locally surrounding areas of Tampa, Orlando and Sarasota.
Ineligibility for U.S. citizenship and potential deportation.
There is an old cliché first coined by Henry Kett in 1814 that Abraham Lincoln later made famous. The proverb states “Every man who is his own lawyer, has a fool for a client.” This adage recognizes that although American law permits an individual to represent himself in criminal court, to do so is often a foolish endeavor.
The law is highly complex and your personal emotions could interfere with your ability to make decisions that are in your best interest. You are likely to be less objective about your case then independent counsel. More importantly, an experienced Pinellas county criminal defense lawyer is apt to identify weaknesses in the prosecutor’s case or suggest strategies that you would have missed.
Can My Record of Arrest be Sealed or Expunged?
Avoiding a felony conviction will often allow our clients to seal or expunge their heroin arrest records if they have never previously been convicted of a criminal offense. See: Do All Employers Run Criminal Background Checks? and Seal or Expunge Your Pinellas County Criminal Record & Land That New Job.
Call our office at and schedule a free consultation. Together, we can review the facts and circumstances of your case and discuss which course of action is in your best interest in your efforts to avoid a felony conviction for possession of heroin. It is important to have a strategy designed to achieve the best possible outcome. We can help!
At Russo & Russo, we are Pinellas attorneys who represent clients charged with possession of heroin and other criminal offenses arising out of St. Petersburg, Clearwater, and the Pinellas County area.
What is Drug Trafficking in Florida?
What is the Florida Prescription Drug Database?
Why is There a Record Number of Pinellas Oxycodone Prosecutions?
The St. Petersburg, Florida criminal defense team at Russo & Russo, P.A. have noticed a growing trend in doctor shopping, drug trafficking and prescription fraud investigations by local law enforcement. Pinellas County Sheriff’s Detectives, along with police officers in the surrounding St. Petersburg / Clearwater areas are increasingly using “Blast Faxes” to “blanket” countless pharmacies. The police are seeking information about prescriptions the pharmacy has on file for a particular person of interest. Sometimes, these “blast faxes” are not limited to a particular county, but can be targeted to an entire large region of Florida.
When pharmacies receive these requests from law enforcement, they normally respond by providing information about the nature and quantity of controlled substances that were prescribed and purchased by the customer in question. The pharmacies appear all too happy to respond to the fax. They voluntarily agree to provide the records and generally do not require a subpoena or search warrant to produce the information. The police officer personally visits the individual pharmacies and secures copies of pharmacy records that include the names and addresses of the prescribing physicians. Sometimes, the police officer collects copies of the prescriptions themselves. All of this is done through the voluntary compliance of the pharmacy without any official legal process having been undertaken.
Some “narcotic agreements” are drafted by attorneys retained by the physician. Of course, these lawyers make every effort to protect the best interests of the doctor. As a result, sometimes the written “narcotic agreements” will contain language waiving doctor/patient confidentiality. These clauses are included to provide protection for the doctor at the expense of the patient. Common contract/narcotic agreement language may include: “the doctor has the right to release medical information to law enforcement and to fully cooperate with any investigation by the police.” See: “Police Requests for Patient Narcotics Agreements: Placing Physicians Between a Rock and a Hard Place” that appeared in the Florida Medical Association Magazine, Fall 2008.
2.) Did the suspect/patient withhold information from you that he had secured a similar prescription from a second doctor?
Although not all appellate judges are in agreement, the decision of Scott Lee Mullis v. State of Florida, by the Second District Court of Appeal interprets Florida Statute Section 893.07(4) to authorize police officers to secure pharmacy records without the benefit of warrant, a subpoena, or even prior notice to the patient. Therefore, in most cases, prescription information and other documents secured from your pharmacist by “blast faxes” would constitute lawfully secured evidence in a criminal prosecution.
However, it is what police officers do next with that information that crosses the line in the eyes of the law. A law enforcement officer is prohibited from securing your medical records, patient histories, progress notes or medication records without first providing you with advanced notice that they intend to seek a court order. The police are also prohibited from soliciting your medical and prescription drug information by questioning your doctor, or any member of his medical staff.
This protection is guaranteed by your “right of privacy” under article 1, section 23 of the Florida Constitution. The Florida Supreme Court in State v. Johnson expressly found that this privacy right extends to your medical records. Likewise, medical records are protected against the prying eyes of law enforcement under Florida Statute Section 456.057. There is even a strong argument under Florida Administrative Code Sections 64B15-14.005 (5)&(8) “Standards for the Use of Controlled Substances for Treatment of Pain” that the “narcotics agreement” itself constitutes a protected medical record since it contains “instructions and agreements” pertaining to your medical care.
Unless you have previously signed a proper release, or the police first secure a valid subpoena, search warrant or court order, they are prohibited from seeing your “Narcotics Agreement,” as well as, any and all medical records held by your doctor’s office.
Our office maintains a rather comprehensive website dedicated to Florida Prescription Fraud cases. We are former state prosecutors who limit our practice to appearing only within the Pinellas County Criminal Court system. As a result, we are not only accustomed to regular dealing with our local State Attorney’s Office, but we are also very familiar with the customs and practices of the Pinellas County Circuit Court judges who will be assigned to your case. We routinely represent clients charged with prescription drug offenses and make regular appearances on behalf of clients in the Pinellas County Drug Court.
Our law firm has been“AV Rated” and we are included in the prestigious “Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers.” What that means, is that we have been judged by other lawyers as possessing the highest level of skill, integrity and ethical standards. As such, you can feel comfortable knowing that we are committed to extending our clients the highest level of professional care.
GPS Tracking: A Technologically Advanced Infringement of Your Fourth Amendment Rights?
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the people the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. But that right has been slowly eroded by an many "exceptions to the warrant requirement." Since 1791, the US government has been hard at work to create exceptions to your right to be free from unreasonable or unwarranted searches and seizures.
One would think that St. Petersburg police officers should not be allowed to go onto your driveway, crawl under your car, place a GPS tracker (link 3) on your bumper, and monitor your every movement for over a month... all without a warrant. Such disregard for personal property and privacy does not seem to even come close to comporting with the notion of being secured in your effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. But the Federal District Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, (United States of America v. Juan Pineda-Moreno) and at least one District Court in Florida have held that the surreptitious placement of a GPS tracking system onto your car, while it’s parked in your driveway, is not technically a search under the Fourth Amendment.
Apparently, you have no expectation of privacy in your driveway, unless you can afford to have a gated private drive. But even if you have the financial ability to afford a gated private drive, the Courts' decisions suggest that all law enforcement has to do is follow your car and wait for you to thereafter park anywhere in a public place. For example...while you are in the store buying groceries, the police could lawfully be hiding a tiny device on your car that will tell them everywhere you go and how long you stay.
2.) That law enforcement has long "tailed" suspects through the old fashioned method of simply surreptitiously following them. Such a police practice did not require a warrant. Under this view, a GPS tracker is merely a more convenient method of following a suspect's movement, but represents no more of an intrusion or "search."
In our opinion, such an analysis misses the mark entirely. The greatest problem with the unfettered use of GPS trackers is not just the ability it gives to the police to follow a particular persons movement. It's the fact that the police can conduct the monitoring 24 hours a day, seven days a week, without committing any real investigative resources to the operation. Such unrestricted power exposes the public to the very real danger that their movements can be tracked, catalogued, and recorded at the whim of "Big Brother..." all without the need for a showing of "probable cause."
As of now, these GPS trackers have been used primarily in drug trafficking cases. The next step could likely be the police using GPS to monitor the comings and goings of all those on probation. Beyond that, it won't be long before someone gets the bright idea to use GPS to keep tabs on those person convicted of a felony, or monitor the vehicle of somebody that has a suspended license. Many members of the public might not object to the use of the device in this manner. However, they miss the real danger that this practice has the ability to make all of us suspects, all the time.
Already a "cheap" technology, a wider application of GPS tracking by the police will no doubt continue to develop. Whereas our own Second District Court of Appeal has yet to rule on this issue, we are hopeful that when it does, the court will embrace the important principles of privacy embodied in the U.S. Constitution.
Arrested for a Drug Offense in Pinellas County? We Can Help!
We are experienced criminal defense lawyers who regularly prescription fraud, doctor shopping, and other drug related offenses arising out of the St. Petersburg /Clearwater area.
It's two in the morning and you are awoken by a ringing telephone on your night stand. This can't be good! It never is. You drag yourself to the edge of the bed and at the same time attempt to clear the cobwebs from your head. Picking up the phone you you hear several people yelling. The acoustics are poor and in the midst of all the din you discern the familiar, yet frightened voice of a family member or friend. He tells you he's been arrested and he is scared. He is very scared. You learn that he is in the Pinellas County Jail and he wants you to get him out as soon as possible. Well of course you will help, you tell him. "But what happened," you inquire. "What did you do? Were you drinking?"
You May Have Just Facilitated a Confession!
Despite your best intentions to help, your discussion about the facts of the case over the jail phone may have just amounted to a recorded confession.That is because all incoming and outgoing telephone calls from the Pinellas county jail are recorded by the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office. If a case is later set for trial, the recordings are routinely reviewed by prosecutors to ascertain whether any incriminating statements can be used against the accused to help secure a conviction. In the example above, if your friend or relative unknowingly answered the questions "what did you do?" or "were you drinking?" he may have provided the the prosecutor with the very ammunition needed to sink the ship.
Normally, the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution would protect you from a warrantless recording of your telephone conversation. However, the courts have ruled that for security purposes, an inmate has no "expectation of privacy” from phone calls made from inside a jail or prison. The logic or rationale is that by virtue of his incarceration, the inmate gives up a limited amount of his rights since he could be planning an escape or break-out from the correctional facility or making plans to secure contraband or a weapon that could jeopardize the safety of the correctional officers. Thus, the jail is authorized to record and "eavesdrop" on any conversations conducted through the jail facility's phone system.
Likewise, the protections afforded by Miranda warnings and the Fifth Amendment don't apply, since the application of those principles are only applicable to "custodial interrogations" conducted by the police or governmental agents.
3.) As tempting as it may be to tell their side of the story, instruct them not to relate the facts of their case to any other inmate in the Pinellas county jail. That person could later be called as a witness against them by the prosecutor and in turn shown favoritism in their own prosecution.
4.) Reassure them that you will be immediately contacting an attorney to learn your best options for securing their release. Inform them that this might include efforts to secure an R.O.R. (Release on their Own Recognizance without posting a bond); posting a cash bond, or in the alternative, using the services of a bail bondsman to post a surety bond.
If you do get a call from the jail in the middle of the night, resist the urge to find out what led to the arrest. It's better to concentrate on securing the release of your friend or relative in the cheapest and quickest manner possible. You can then carefully select a criminal defense attorney with the appropriate background and experience to address the legal problem. There will be plenty of time to later sit down in the comfort of his office and discuss the facts of the case.
methods for securing a person’s release from the Pinellas County Jail.
Charged with a DUI or a Criminal Offense?
Russo & Russo are attorneys who represent clients charged with Traffic Tickets, DUI and criminal offense arising out of St. Petersburg, Clearwater and other areas of Pinellas County.
As more than 1.7 million college students begin their annual Spring Break, police in Pinellas County are anxiously awaiting their arrival. Law enforcement will have stepped up patrols on all the beaches. Our office has confirmed that there will be a greatly increased police presence, with special emphasis on all offenses associated with alcohol consumption (open alcohol containers, disorderly intoxication, and driving under the influence).
Security camera surveillance, undercover officers, and DUI checkpoints are just some of the tactics local law enforcement are using this Spring Break season to send a "zero tolerance" message. Undercover officers working with Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents will focus on identifying and arresting underage drinkers. Law enforcement intends to employ frequent DUI patrols on Sunset Beach. In addition, there will be coordinated DUI checkpoints along Gulf Boulevard. You can count on aggressive, large scale DUI enforcement, for Spring Breakers and any locals caught in the same net.
After an outcry from Treasure Island residents who have tired of dealing with rowdy partygoers, the City Commission has responded by steadily increasing police presence. Numerous angry complaints at city commission meetings and video posts on the Internet regarding beach disturbances recently prompted new laws banning beer kegs and glass bottles from Sunset Beach.
The Treasure Island Board of Commissioners also went one step further in anticipation of the 2010 Spring Break rush. The city website warns beachgoers to "Smile! You're on camera!" since high-resolution security cameras on poles have been mounted to the north and south of the ever-popular Caddy's on the Beach bar. Police now have a far easier method to monitor crowds on the beach and identify potential criminal activity. The city has gone so far as to establish a new Twitter page in an effort to warn students who plan to party on Treasure Island's beaches.
Outraged Sunset Beach residents initiated a lawsuit against the city for failing to enforce parking regulations. Fifteen residents have filed a separate lawsuit against Caddy's for violating city parking regulations and allowing parking to overflow into once quiet residential neighborhoods. As a result, watch out for increased parking enforcement and tickets. Despite the fact that not everyone parking near the beach is looking for a drink at Caddy's, both Spring Breakers and locals can expect a parking citation frenzy.
In an effort to deter others from committing crimes, law enforcement will now be initiating more arrests on the beach rather than simply issuing "notice to appear" citations for court. They plan on sending a sobering message by making routine public arrests for the purposes of having crowds witness a suspect handcuffed and placed into the back of a police cruiser. Any criminal offense committed, even those of a minor nature, will prompt police to take swift action and deliver offenders directly to the Pinellas County Jail.
With all of the increased police activity on Treasure Island this Spring Break season, we question whether a trip to Sunset Beach is really worth the hassle. For that matter, we anticipate law enforcement agencies in every beach community will be on "heightened alert" during Spring Break. Nevertheless, if you decide to visit, be aware that no one, whether a local or not, will be immune to the zero tolerance attitude of the police.
Charged with a DUI or a Criminal Offense? We Can Help!
Cultivation of Marijuana & the Florida "Grow House Eradication Act"
According to Time Magazine, Florida is currently the United States leader in indoor marijuana cultivation. The escalation of marijuana operations in Florida is the result of the large residential foreclosure market in Florida. Marijuana growers have been quick to exploit the abundance of relatively inexpensive suburban homes. The crisis currently affects much of the state, with grow-houses raided in 40 out of 67 counties in the year 2008. Over the past 20 years, approximately 2.9 billion dollars worth of marijuana has been seized from indoor and outdoor cultivation sites in Florida.
Marijuana that is grown indoors can be grown hydroponically. Instead of using soil, the grower would supply the plant with a nutrient enriched water solution. This method of growing allows drug manufacturers to artificially increase the level of THC in the plants. Hydroponically grown cannabis is on average 4 times as strong as the marijuana grown outdoors in the 1980’s. The rise in strength has led to a corresponding increase in value, with some sellers receiving as much as $8,000 per pound when sold in the north-eastern United States.
For a survey of the positions taken by law enforcement officers concerning the effects of grow houses see: Marijuana Grow Houses: Florida’s Silently Growing Epidemic.
In 2008, Charlie Crist signed the Grow House Eradication Act into law to combat what government authorities perceive to be an "epidemic." The Act unsurprisingly received praise from the law enforcement community and was strongly supported by Attorney General of Florida, Bill McCollum.
A person who leases or owns a structure or vehicle who knows it will be used for the sale or manufacturing of a controlled substance faces a 3rd degree felony.
A person who is in actual or constructive possession of a similar structure or conveyance commits a 2nd degree felony.
If a minor is present in the structure or conveyance and the person knows that the minor is present then they commit a 1st degree felony.
The statutory provisions apply to individuals determined to intend the marijuana for sale or distribution. The presence of 25 or more marijuana plants is presumptive evidence of the intent to sell or distribute. Before the law was enacted, 300 plants were required before a presumption of an intent to sell or distribute could attach. The substantial reduction in the number of plants required to meet the threshold for intent could lead to small time growers facing penalties as if they were drug kingpins.
Drug charges stemming from marijuana and other drugs can be classified into three distinct categories: misdemeanor possession of marijuana, felony possession of a controlled substance and drug trafficking. Many charges are further refined based on the weight of the drugs seized. In particular, drug trafficking charges carry mandatory minimum terms in state prison based on the total weight of the drugs seized. Even a charge as seemingly simple as misdemeanor possession of marijuana can have far-reaching consequences, including a mandatory driver's license suspension and a permanent record of arrest and conviction.
Due to the severe penalties for drug charges, our office recommends proactive solutions tailored to fit the individual circumstances of our client’s cases. Depending on the facts and circumstances of your case, our office may attempt to have your charges dismissed through a PTI Diversion program, seek a withhold of adjudication to prevent a formal conviction, and work to avoid the imposition of a jail sentence.
After being arrested for a drug related crime, it can be difficult to secure employment. Many employers are concerned about prior drug use and may associate it with poor work performance or a propensity toward other crimes. It is all too easy for a manager in this economic climate to completely overlook a job candidate based on prior criminal charges. However, securing the best possible outcome could qualify you to have your criminal records sealed or expunged.
Russo & Russo attorneys represent clients charged Traffic Tickets, DUI and criminal offense arising out of St. Petersburg, Clearwater and other areas of Pinellas County.
Have you been arrested, charged, or have an outstanding warrant in relation to a drug offense in the St. Petersburg/Clearwater area? If so, call us for a free consultation at: (727) 578-0303.
Administratively revoking the driving privilege of motorists who refuse to submit to a breath test or subjecting them to criminal penalties for their refusal.
Using a refusal as evidence of guilt for the underlying charge of DUI.
In Florida, a prosecutor can inform a jury that the DUI driver refused to submit to a breath test and argue that the “refusal” is proof of a “consciousness of guilt.” In other words, the driver refused the breath test only because he knew the results would be over the presumptive level of impairment.
Allow police officers in limited circumstances to secure a blood sample without a warrant, with reasonable force if necessary, from an uncooperative driver.
In Florida, drivers who have been involved in an accident and transported to a medical facility for treatment can be requested to submit to a blood draw if the taking of breath or urine becomes impossible or impracticable. An extreme statutory remedy of a “forcible blood draw” is available only when the driver caused the death or serious bodily injury of themselves or another person. See 2009->Ch0316->Section%201933#0316.1933">Fla. Stat. 316.1933(1).
There is currently no statutory limitation on the use of a warrant by law enforcement to secure a blood sample against the will of a person who is routinely arrested for DUI. Consequently, Florida courts are required to look to the Florida Constitution for guidance as to whether new programs designed to collect blood samples at DUI check points or incident to arrest will pass constitutional muster.
Such programs could be arguably constitutional in Florida because Article I Sect. 12 of the Florida Constitution states that the protections against unreasonable search and seizure are identical to the protections offered by the U.S. Constitution. Thus, Florida State court judges are instructed by the Florida Constitution to follow U.S. Supreme Court precedent when construing the right against unreasonable search and seizure. Unlike some sister states, Florida affords no greater 4th amendment protections to its citizenry that those afforded by the U.S. Constitution.
The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” Under the Search and Seizure provision of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, forcible blood draws subsequent to an arrest for DUI are lawful. The U.S. Supreme Court in Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966) has long ago ruled that a blood sample may be taken from a DUI suspect. The Court in Schmerber determined that blood draws are not prohibited by the right against self-incrimination. The U.S. Supreme Court did of course put a limitation on the collection of blood, by requiring that the blood must be drawn pursuant to a lawful arrest.
Getting a warrant requires preparation of a sworn affidavit that establishes probable cause and review by an impartial magistrate (Judge). Of course, time is of the essence since alcohol in the blood stream may be eliminated by the human body with the passage of time. For this reason, Florida prosecutors are currently taking steps to streamline the process of securing evidentiary blood samples from persons routinely arrested for DUI.
In Brevard County, the Palm Bay Police Department sought to overcome the limitations of a driver’s refusal to Submit to a breath test. Law enforcement employed a template type document on a word processing machine inside of their mobile breath testing van. They quickly prepared an affidavit requesting the issuance of a search warrant for the extraction of a sample of the Defendant’s blood to test its alcohol content. The arresting officer then executed the affidavit and faxed it along with a proposed search warrant to the home of a local judge. The judge signed the warrant and faxed it back to the officer who transported the Defendant to the hospital for a blood draw that was performed by a certified phlebotomist. It’s important to note that the specimen was taken without the permission and consent of the driver who voiced his objection to same. A subsequent motion to suppress the blood results was denied by the court and the Defendant’s blood alcohol results were subsequently introduced into evidence against him. State v. Isley, 11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1102a (Brevard County, September 15, 2004) See also: State v. Dunning, CT23787AXXX-MA (Duval County, Feb. 13, 2009); State v. McKinnon, CT18431AXXX-MA (Duval County, Feb. 19, 2009); State v. St. George, CT24421AXXX-MA (Duval County, January 29, 2009).
A close reading of the Isley decision reveals that law enforcement’s request for the warrant to extract the driver’s blood may have been denied by the judge, had the Defendant not assured the police officer that he did not suffer from any medical condition that would be aggravated or affected by the blood draw. For example, had the driver indicated that he suffered from hemophilia or AIDS, the judge would in all likelihood have refused to sign the warrant.
DUI prosecutions are recognized as perhaps one of the most complex criminal cases to litigate. They involve scientific evidence, breath testing administrative rules, DHSMV administrative proceedings, field sobriety testing and a host of evidentiary issues.
If you have been arrested for a DUI in Pinellas County, Florida you need a lawyer with the unique experience and background to thoroughly investigate all of your defenses. You can visit our DUI Web site at: www.duistpetersburglawyer.com for answers to Frequently Asked DUI Questions.
Free consultations that are focused on creating an effective legal strategy to achieve the best possible outcome.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.