Orlando Criminal Lawyer - The Fischer Law Blog

Interview on Ed Tyll show regarding Casey Anthony case

2011-05-09T12:34:00.002-04:00

I was interviewed today on the Ed Tyll show, a local radio show on 810 AM, regarding the Casey Anthony case.

We discussed jury sequestration, reasonable doubt, and whether Casey's parents should be allowed in the courtroom during the trial.

Opening a satellite office

2011-04-30T16:50:00.001-04:00

I am proud to announce we are expanding! Our new office is in Lake Mary, near the Jax 5th Ave off Greenwood Blvd. The physical address is:

115 Timberlacen Cir.

Suite 1013-A

Lake Mary, FL 32746-3303

Office hours by appointment.

Dan Newlin busted for DUI

2011-04-08T16:43:00.007-04:00

Early Friday morning high-profile accident attorney (and former Sheriff's Detective) Dan Newlin was arrested for DUI. Following his release from jail he spoke with the press about his arrest.

After reading the arrest report, I think the State Attorney's Office is going to have a hard time convicting Mr. Newlin of anything for three reasons:

1. No driving pattern to indicate impairment;

2. No physical evidence of impairment, since he refused both the standard field-sobriety exercises as well as a breath test; and

3. A strong argument that the arresting officer was biased against him based on his standing in the community.

On the other hand, Dan gave some pretty silly responses after getting out of jail. For example:

1. Why does he refer to himself in the 3rd person? That just sounds cheesy;

2. Portraying himself as the "victim" of an overzealous police investigation doesn't make him sound like a responsible citizen; and

3. As a former deputy sheriff, he should know darn well that there was no policy change allowing him to choose whether he took a breath or a blood test. Any first year police officer knows that!

Check out the arrest report here. Check out the unedited interview here.

Casey Anthony and Tracy Ocasio

2011-04-04T20:32:00.004-04:00

I can't help but wonder if the media would be this obsessed with the Casey Anthony and Tracy Ocasio cases if both girls were black. Does that sound racist? Of course it does. However, having been involved in the criminal justice system for almost a decade, it seems the media only pays attention to cases involving pretty white girls.

Tragically, lots of kids die every year, whether by drowning, disease, or at the hands of their own parents. What makes Casey Anthony's case any different?

Likewise, thousands of people go missing every year. What makes Tracy Ocasio's disappearance any more upsetting than if a poor black or Hispanic person were to disappear?

Another Dolphins player in trouble with the law

2010-07-19T22:36:00.001-04:00

Miami Dolphins Defensive End Phillip Merling was officially charged with Aggravated Battery on a Pregnant Person today. If convicted, he could face up to 15 years state prison. In fact, under Florida's sentencing guidelines, if convicted he would likely wind up doing prison time; however, there are always exceptions to the general rule. First, the prosecutors have to obtain a conviction. If the alleged victim doesn't want to press charges, and the police cannot prove the crime by independent evidence, then they may have to drop the charges against him.

Miami Dolphins receiver Brian Hartline may be charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident w/Property Damage

2010-07-14T07:50:00.002-04:00

I'm a big Miami Dolphins fan, so I feel it necessary to comment on a recent article suggesting that second year receiver Brian Hartline may face charges of Leaving the Scene of an Accident.

On July 3 a pickup truck owned by Hartline was headed east on Interstate 595 in Ft. Lauderdale when it struck a Cadillac Escalade that was legally parked on the side of the road. The truck continued east on 595 for a few hundred feet before stopping due to the damage it sustained. Since Hartline owned the truck FHP troopers want to question him about his involvement in the accident. He could face misdemeanor charges.

As his attorney, I would tell him in no uncertain terms not to say anything to police. The police have the burden of proving he was the driver at the time of the crash, and without a statement by him or an independent witness, there's no way anyone can prove Hartline was behind the wheel at the time of the crash. I wouldn't make their job any easier by telling them who was, even if he knew who was driving.

Calculating time-served

2010-06-30T22:08:00.003-04:00

I represent a young man on a Violation of Probation (VOP). He was arrested back in 2001 for Grand Theft - Motor Vehicle and Driving While License Suspended With Knowledge - 2 Prior Convictions (DWLS). Both offenses were 3rd Degree Felonies, each punishable by up to 5 years in state prison. After spending nearly 10 months in jail he entered a plea to both charges: 5 years in prison for the Grand Theft followed by 5 years of consecutive probation for the DWLS.

Unfortunately, after my client was released from prison he allegedly violated his probation. To add insult to injury, the judge may not give him credit for the 10 months he spent in jail prior to entry of his plea because the original sentencing paperwork does not indicate that he was to get credit for the time spent in jail on the DWLS. I'm arguing that the law requires he be given credit for the time he spent in jail back in 2001 because he was doing time for both the DWLS and the Grand Theft prior to entry of his plea. The prosecutors, of course, feel otherwise.

I go back to court at the end of July for my client's sentencing. I'll keep you posted of this interesting case.

Going the extra mile

2010-03-13T00:56:00.003-05:00

I represented a young, first time offender who was charged with Delivery of Cocaine, a 2nd Degree Felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison. After reviewing the police report, it looked like they had my client dead to rights, as the undercover officer noted that my client and his co-defendant were both actively involved in the drug deal.

I obtained the co-defendant's arrest report and was shocked at what I saw: BOTH POLICE REPORTS (written by the same officer) said two different things; specifically, each report said that one individual defendant took the money and handed the cocaine to the police officer, without mentioning a thing about the other defendant's involvement.

How can two police reports written within minutes of each other, minutes after the deal took place, contain such glaring inconsistencies? After pointing this out to the prosecutor I informed him that we weren't interested in a plea and were demanding a speedy trial. The judge dismissed the charges shortly thereafter.

My $.02 on the Casey Anthony case

2009-11-24T22:25:00.005-05:00

Recently the defense sought to discredit Ray Kronk, the former meter reader who found Caylee's body, by accusing him of killing Caylee. Now nobody I know who even remotely follows this case would believe for one second that Mr. Kronk killed the poor kid, but the defense wants us to believe Kronk did it because he was violent in his past relationships. The defense's theory that Kronk was the killer is based solely on his previous violent conduct, even though there's no evidence Kronk and Caylee ever met before Caylee's death.

Instead of trying to destroy Kronk's credibility, the defense should consider embracing it. Since it's well known that Kronk attempted to notify law enforcement that something suspicious was in the woods where Caylee was eventually found, the defense should be highlighting Kronk's involvement to blame the police for doing an incomplete investigation. Casey's attorney should argue this bad investigation creats a reasonable doubt on Casey's guilt, because the police were more interested in getting a quick arrest than they were about doing a thorough investigation. Had the police done a thorough investigation and been more concerned with solving it right rather than solving it quickly, the argument goes, their investigation would've revealed that the evidence against Casey was inconsistent, and that someone ELSE killed poor Caylee.

Further, the defense can mitigate Casey's odd behavior during Caylee's disappearance by arguing that Casey was devastated by the disappearance of her daughter and felt guilty that she couldn't protect her, so she lied because she didn't want people thinking she was a bad mom. It's certainly not the strongest argument, but it's better than letting the prosecutors paint Casey as a liar who covered up Caylee's death because she didn't want to get caught.

When a "ticket" is more than a "ticket"

2009-11-24T00:10:00.002-05:00

Some tickets are non-criminal infractions, punishable by a small fine, points on your license, and maybe traffic school. These infractions go on your driving record, but aren’t criminal convictions, so you won’t have a RAP sheet; it won’t affect your employment; and failure to pay the ticket or complete the required courses won’t result in any jail time.

Other tickets are really criminal charges, punishable just like an arrest for shoplifting, marijuana possession, or domestic violence. However, because the officer only gives you a paper ticket and doesn’t slap cuffs on you, take you to jail, or force you to bond out, most people don’t take their case seriously.

Unfortunately, I see many potential clients mistakenly believe they can resolve their Driving While License Suspended or Leaving The Scene of an Accident charge without hiring an attorney, as they feel it’s "just a ticket." Only later, when they’ve been turned down for a job because they have a criminal record, or when they can’t get their professional license because of their criminal record, do they realize they didn’t just "get a ticket."

If you have been cited by the police for any of the following: Driving While License Suspended; Reckless Driving; Leaving the Scene of an Accident; Expired Driver License >4 months; Attaching a Tag Not Assigned to the Vehicle; or No Registration, it is very important to seek advice from an experienced criminal defense attorney, as these "tickets" can affect your permanent record, and may even affect your ability to get or keep a job.

Pay now or pay later

2009-11-17T09:05:00.002-05:00

I’ve met with many potential clients recently who decided to defend themselves because they felt they couldn’t afford a lawyer. One month later they are back in my office begging me to help them withdraw their plea because they can’t make their probation commitments; they can’t afford the mandatory treatment/classes/fines; or they lost their job as a result of their plea.
Unfortunately, these potential clients face an uphill battle attempting to withdraw their plea, which will cost them more than if they hired an attorney from the beginning of their case.

Hiring a lawyer will save you money. Since unrepresented defendants are called last, you will miss hours of work or class. As your lawyer, I will go to court for you. Also, when your appearance is mandatory, your case will get called first, as judges call cases with attorneys before they call unrepresented defendants.

Also, Assistant State Attorneys love dealing with naive, unrepresented defendants because they know you don’t know what a fair plea offer is; whether you have a legitimate defense to the crime; or if the prosecutors can even prove their case! Only by participating in discovery can a lawyer evaluate all the evidence and negotiate the best possible outcome for you.

Lastly, an attorney may be able to get charges dropped, reduced, or negotiate a more favorable resolution than you could get on your own. This could result in reduced fines, costs, or other expenses, potentially making the lawyer’s fee pay for itself.

Consequently, I hope that if you are facing criminal charges you will choose to "pay now" for competent legal advice instead of "pay later" for an unfair resolution.

For more reasons why hiring a lawyer is critical when facing criminal charges, check out my Top 10 Mistakes People Make When Facing Criminal Charges.

Case reopened after 27 years

2009-11-04T23:12:00.002-05:00

Nov. 4th article in the Orlando Sentiel:

Authorities in Central Florida will reopen a 1981 homicide investigation that previously ended with the conviction of a man who was imprisoned for 27 years before DNA evidence cast doubt on the case.

Brevard County Sheriff Jack Parker said in a statement that testimony during this week's compensation hearing for former inmate William Dillon convinced his agency to reopen the original investigation.

"We need to do everything we can to determine the truth in this case regardless of whether or not it can be successfully prosecuted," Parker said in the statement, released Tuesday night. "I have absolute confidence that if there is anything that can be found, our Homicide Unit will find it."

Dillon, 50, was convicted of the 1981 bludgeoning death of James Dvorak, a brutal killing that authorities described as a robbery gone wrong. New DNA testing led to Dillon's release from prison last year, and a judge ordered a new trial. But prosecutors later dropped the murder charge.

"They should have been doing this a year ago," said Seth Miller, executive director of the Innocence Project of Florida. "A year has gone by, the case has gotten colder. It's going to make it that much more difficult to solve the case. You have to question what their intentions are.

"When asked in an e-mail to explain the timing of the announcement, as well as whether authorities would investigate those who worked on the original Dvorak case, a Brevard County Sheriff's Office spokeswoman declined to comment further.

Dillon testified in Tallahassee this week during a hearing on claims bills filed in the House and Senate that would compensate him $1.35 million. A jailhouse informant whose testimony put Dillon in prison also spoke to a pair of special masters, who have been appointed by each legislative chamber. In his testimony, the informant recanted statements he made decades ago.

Roger Dale Chapman said an investigator threatened him with prison and told him to get a confession out of Dillon.

"I feel that today's technology and stuff like that will probably help secure a better conviction on the actual perpetrator," Dillon said Wednesday. "I firmly believe that the light is on them now, and if they do come up with a suspect, then they'll probably have who it is."

Dillon's case is similar to that of Wilton Dedge, who served 22 years in Florida's prison system for a 1981 rape he didn't commit. Dedge's case was also in Brevard County and DNA evidence helped free him.

"We have to ask ourselves, why this? Why now? Why weren't they investigating after Wilton Dedge's case?" Miller said. "That's the big issue here. I think there's good cause to be skeptical."

Beware the cheap lawyer! (Part 1)

2009-08-02T13:58:00.003-04:00

During these difficult economic times people are looking to save money wherever they can. This is understandable. However, there are certain things one much not scrimp one, no matter what the circumstances: good insurance, good health care, and a good lawyer. This is because good legal advice is not cheap, and cheap legal advice is not good.

Criminal charges could follow you for the rest of your life. Whether it’s a job, professional license, or security clearance, if you are charged with a crime you need an attorney with the experience and advocacy skills to achieve the best possible result. Unfortunately, many people hire attorneys based on price, rather than quality.

Most $500 lawyers don’t have the necessary experience to properly defend you. They want a quick resolution because they are scared to go to trial or fight the prosecutors. Rather, they convince you to plea because they don’t know what options are available to minimize your punishment. As a result, the money you "saved" on your cheap lawyer costs more in the form of probation costs, fines, and court costs.

Orlando Criminal Lawyer Shane Fischer

Don't abscond from probation!

2009-06-26T09:07:00.004-04:00

It's not unusual for someone on probation to miss a payment, fail to complete a program timely, or have a dirty urine. Instead of facing this minor violation and the possibility of a few days in jail followed by a slap on the wrist, they take off and abscond from probation. Months or years later, when they are paranoid about being arrested for an outstanding warrant, they attempt to mitigate their circumstances by showing the judge that they stayed out of trouble during the time they were supposed to be on probation.

Unfortunately, no judge has sympathy for this argument. This is because you are SUPPOSED to stay out of trouble while on probation; you aren't going to be rewarded for this. As a result, what would have been a minor violation now results in a lenghty jail/prison sentence because the judge sees you as a fugitive, not as a human who simply fell on hard times.

Defining confidentiality

2009-05-16T10:56:00.003-04:00

I represent a young man charged with a violent, serious offense. The offense carries a maximum penalty of life in prison. Additionally, there is a mandatory minimum punishment of several years upon conviction.

I have met my client at the county jail several times to discuss his case and keep him updated on my progress, which includes investigating the alleged victim's background, observations, and biases. I reminded the client that I was required to tell him both the good and the bad news about his case so he can make an informed decision how he wants to proceed.

Shortly thereafter, I received a call from his mother, who was very upset that I haven't shared details of the case with her. I explained that my communications with my client were strictly confidential, and I was not obligated to tell ANYONE, even the client's mother, what we discussed or our case strategies.

While she was understandably upset, I remained loyal to my client's interests, and refused to reveal anything that I discussed with my client.

Quoted in Orlando Sentinel

2009-05-04T10:46:00.001-04:00

I was quoted in today's Orlando Sentinel regarding justifiable use of deadly force. The issue was whether a person can shoot someone who has broken into their home or business. I explained that, pursuant to Florida Statutes, an individual is justified in using deadly force in their home if they reasonably believe that they are about to be injured or killed by the burglar. Moreover, even if the police and prosecutors felt that you didn't have the right to kill the intruder, you will likey face a very sympathetic jury, as any homeowner will understand your circumstances and likely find you not guilty.

Orlando Criminal Lawyer Shane Fischer

Judge denies Defendant's Motion to Terminate Jurisdiction

2009-05-01T08:51:00.001-04:00

(See previous post for procedural history)

In State v. A.S. I filed a Motion to Terminate Jurisdiction, arguing that Fla. Stat. 985.0301(5)(a) gives the Court jurisdiction over a Child only until their 19th birthday. In this case, since the Child recently turned 19, the Court was without jurisdiction to amend the Child's previous sentence.

The prosecutor argued that Fla. Stat. 985.0301(5)(c) was the subsection giving the court jurisdiction until the Child turns 21, because subsectin (5)(a) provides for jurisdiction over a juvenile who is alleged to have commmitted a delinquent act only until 19, but once they have been adjudicated delinquent and committed to the Dept. of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) the court has jurisdiction until the Child is 21.

In this case, since A.S. was adjudicated delinquent while he was still 18, the Court ruled that it had jurisdiction over him until 21, or until discharged by DJJ. Rather than granting the State's Motion to Extend Jurisdiction, the Court simply clarified their existing Order that the Child was subject to the court's jurisdiciton until A.S.'s 21st birthday or until he was discharged by DJJ. The court cited M.A. v. State, 959 So. 2d 380 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 4th Dist. 2007) as precedent.

Orlando Criminal Lawyer

Circuit Judge temporarily denies Prosecutor's Motion to Continue Jurisdiction of Juvenile

2009-04-28T15:19:00.000-04:00

In State v. A.S., the Child pled to a violent felony and was sentenced to a high risk program with the Dept. of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). However, DJJ felt that a high risk program was not appropriate for him. Consequently, the State, Court, and the Child agreed that the Child should be placed in a moderate-risk program.

DJJ subsequently felt that a moderate-risk program was too much for the Child, and instead placed him on supervised probation. Since the Child was complying with all the terms of his probation, DJJ wanted to terminate his supervision. This upset the Assistant State Attorney handling the case because he felt that the Child needed to be punished more severely, so he requested the Court extend jurisdiction over the Child until the Child's 21st birthday (normally the Court loses jurisdiction at 19, however, under rare circumstances the Court has jurisdiction until the Child turns 21).

The Assistant State Attorney argued that A.S.'s circumstances fell under one of the limited exceptions to the rule terminating jurisdiction at 19, and wanted the Judge to sign an Order extending jurisdiction until the Child was 21. Unfortunately, the Assistant State Attorney never filed the proper paperwork, expecting the judge to just rule based on e-mails between DJJ and the State Attorney's Office. I vigorously objected to the entry of any Order because there was no written Motion in the file. The judge denied the Assistant State Attorney's request without prejudice, allowing him time to draft and submit a Motion.

Orlando Criminal Attorney