Our Case Results: All Charges Dismissed in Drug Cases:

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.

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.

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."

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.

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 where 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.

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 consent 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.

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.

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 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."

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."

Our recent drug crime results listed on this internet website do not necessarily represent the results obtained in all cases because not all results are listed. As you can see below, the results in these cases depended on the particular facts and issues presented in those drug cases.

The facts and circumstances of your case may be very different. Therefore, the results we have obtained in the past are not necessarily an indication of the results that we will obtain in the future for any particular client. No attorney can promise you any particular result in your drug case. These case results are provided to give you general information about the types of defenses that we have asserted in drug cases in the past.