CASES
Criminal law -- Driving under influence -- Driving while license permanently revoked -- Appeals -- As applied challenges to constitutionality of DUI and DWLR statutes were not preserved for appellate review where they were not raised in trial court -- Claim that evidence was legally insufficient to sustain conviction for DWLR was not preserved for appellate review where defense made no motion for judgment of acquittal challenging sufficiency of evidence -- Claim that state presented speculative and unfairly prejudicial testimony through its cross-examination of defense witness was not preserved for appeal where defense counsel made only one objection to a single question, and defense counsel did not pursue original objection after prosecutor clarified question -- Claim that state made unfairly prejudicial and legally erroneous argument to jury in closing was not preserved where defendant made no objection to argument, and prosecutor's argument did not constitute fundamental error 33 Fla. L. Weekly D1419a
Criminal law -- DUI manslaughter -- Vehicular homicide -- Driving while license suspended causing serious bodily injury or death -- Continuance -- Unavailability of expert witness -- No abuse of discretion in denying motion for continuance, filed the Friday before trial, in which defense counsel argued that defendant's accident reconstruction expert was unavailable due to his daughter's college graduation -- Defendant was not prejudiced by denial of motion to continue because absence did not hamper defendant's ability to develop his defense -- Moreover, defendant failed to proffer expert's testimony at hearing on motion for continuance or at trial 33 Fla. L. Weekly D1421b
Criminal law -- Promoting sexual performance by child -- No error in denying motion for judgment of acquittal in which defendant contended that the photographs at issue did not depict “sexual conduct” as proscribed by statute because state failed to present evidence that child victim made contact with any of the designated sexual areas of
the defendant -- Statute, as written, defines sexual conduct broadly enough to cover contact by one party with designated sexual areas of another party, regardless of whether child victim is making the contact or receiving the contact -- Jury instructions -- No abuse of discretion in giving special jury instruction that defendant's ignorance of victim's age, victim's misrepresentation of her age, or defendant's bona fide belief of the victim's age, is not a defense to crime charged -- Evidence -- No abuse of discretion in permitting state to admit into evidence photographs taken of inside and outside of defendant's home which depicted various articles of pornography
hung on walls of defendant's home -- No showing that trial court abused its discretion in concluding that photographs were relevant to corroborate testimony presented by state's witnesses concerning fact that crime took place inside defendant's home and to refute claim that photos of child victim were altered by use of computer software-- Sexual predators -- No merit to defendant's argument that trial court reversibly erred in adjudicating defendant to be a sexual predator because Florida's sexual predator statute is unconstitutional as applied to him
33 Fla. L. Weekly D1422b
Criminal law -- Resisting arrest without violence -- Jury instructions -- Lawful execution of legal duty -- Instruction stating, “If you find from evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that police officers were engaged in the act of arresting the defendant based on probable cause, such conduct constitutes a lawful execution of a legal duty,” and defining probable cause -- Instruction did not improperly take the issue of the lawfulness of defendant's arrest from the jury 33 Fla. L. Weekly D1425b
Courtesy of Florida Law Weekly Subscriptions (800) 351-0917
Criminal law -- DUI manslaughter -- Vehicular homicide -- Driving while license suspended causing serious bodily injury or death -- Continuance -- Unavailability of expert witness -- No abuse of discretion in denying motion for continuance, filed the Friday before trial, in which defense counsel argued that defendant's accident reconstruction expert was unavailable due to his daughter's college graduation -- Defendant was not prejudiced by denial of motion to continue because absence did not hamper defendant's ability to develop his defense -- Moreover, defendant failed to proffer expert's testimony at hearing on motion for continuance or at trial 33 Fla. L. Weekly D1421b
Criminal law -- Promoting sexual performance by child -- No error in denying motion for judgment of acquittal in which defendant contended that the photographs at issue did not depict “sexual conduct” as proscribed by statute because state failed to present evidence that child victim made contact with any of the designated sexual areas of
the defendant -- Statute, as written, defines sexual conduct broadly enough to cover contact by one party with designated sexual areas of another party, regardless of whether child victim is making the contact or receiving the contact -- Jury instructions -- No abuse of discretion in giving special jury instruction that defendant's ignorance of victim's age, victim's misrepresentation of her age, or defendant's bona fide belief of the victim's age, is not a defense to crime charged -- Evidence -- No abuse of discretion in permitting state to admit into evidence photographs taken of inside and outside of defendant's home which depicted various articles of pornography
hung on walls of defendant's home -- No showing that trial court abused its discretion in concluding that photographs were relevant to corroborate testimony presented by state's witnesses concerning fact that crime took place inside defendant's home and to refute claim that photos of child victim were altered by use of computer software-- Sexual predators -- No merit to defendant's argument that trial court reversibly erred in adjudicating defendant to be a sexual predator because Florida's sexual predator statute is unconstitutional as applied to him
33 Fla. L. Weekly D1422b
Criminal law -- Resisting arrest without violence -- Jury instructions -- Lawful execution of legal duty -- Instruction stating, “If you find from evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that police officers were engaged in the act of arresting the defendant based on probable cause, such conduct constitutes a lawful execution of a legal duty,” and defining probable cause -- Instruction did not improperly take the issue of the lawfulness of defendant's arrest from the jury 33 Fla. L. Weekly D1425b
Courtesy of Florida Law Weekly Subscriptions (800) 351-0917
What happened between Ostrow and Russell Williams in the cafeteria today? Show down? You would think that Williams was working at Petsmart or Pet Supermarket and not checking out the lady ahead of gary fast enough. One hint would be, never ask anyone if they know who you are, you might get an answer you dont like.
You can bet Williams wimped out if Gary was the aggressor. Gary would cream him. It's the stuff about Williams representing a client that alleged Ostrow apparently misrepresented his qualifications to. That's the drift of it anyway from what I hear. There was a Sun Sentinel reporter sitting there from the way it's told. Williams would run the other way if confronted by Ostrow, you can bet on that.
No doubt about who would win in a face off at trail.
And there are not many who would run from Ostrow
I would have liked to see that. Ostrow running for PD recently busted and Williams the Judge's mouthpiece go mouth to mouth! Man, are things that bad? Who won Mouth of the South?
Williams was quoted in the Media last week regarding a case that went public coincidentally the day after Ostrow made the sentinel front page. Williams criticized Ostrow who was being sued for his alleged lack of qualifications by a first degree murder suspect in Miami. When the family saw Ostrow devoting sifnifiicant funds for his campaign, the suspects family decided that it was their money and only then filed a lawsuit. Despite the suit alledging Ostrow was not qualified for the death case, the court found and the article reported that he was in fact death qualified. The sentinel picks up the propaganda on the day following his arrest and Williams, who is not death qualified, made some critical remarks that I guess didnt give ostrow that warm and fuzzy feeling. When Ostrow saw Williams in the courthouse cafe, he offered a few expletives to Russell as a commentary on Russell's behind -the -back and apparently false public comments regarding his 'expertise"on the case that he referred out and is not qualified to handle. Williams responded in a similiar unkind fashion and invited Ostrow outside, perhaps to beg for Ostrow's forgiveness.....Ostrow kindly requested they settle the matter right there in the bagel place and them some killjoy intervened and destroyed any chance for what may have very well been major blog material. End of story
they probably both had fear in their eyes, gary at least was the smarter of the two and wanted to go at it in the cafe. This way if he was gettin his rear kicked someone could at least save him.
I heard Arreaza just happened to be there gaping at the whole scene...where was Howard? Then the cast would have been complete.
Money on Gary two to one.
I'd like to say your post is a blow by blow description of the events depicted, but you forgot to add the blood in the eyes and their best argument. Killjoy should be reprimanded.
the only people who think the "snow man" would win that fight is gary and his invisible friends. The snow man all 70 lbs of him dripping wet due to his " habit" would be no match for any breathing human being. All RW would have had to do is spill some sweet and low and the snow man would run for it. Any one who thinks or says the Snow man is a good or even great lawyer must share the samepowder with him. He may have been a lawyer 10 years ago but that was before he screwed AJ and had to come back due to his habit. any one who looks him in the eyes will see the truth. The "snow man" would have lost today and will always lose until he admits and goes to drug court for hlp. By the way I am sure Judge Beach will give even him a hug
Wait a minute. Let this seep in. Gary Ostrow wanted to have a fist fight in the courthouse with another attorney? And Arreaza was sitting there? And a reporter? Somebody had to make this up.
Nope, no kidding. Arreaza was sitting there talking with Ostrow when a "minor" exchange of words occurred between Ostrow and Williams. I was sitting at the table next to them and Ostrow was telling Arreaza something about Howard but I coulnd't make out much other than Howard and a witness that Ostrow knows, or has, or sopke to the SAO something like that.
Anyway, Yeah, Ostrow wanted to go at it tight there... I was in awe at them two and Arreaza just stood back and kept telling Ostrow to take it easy.
You have to admire how Areaza kept his cool..
Ok, I have to know! I heard that Finkelstein has retained counsel - a criminal defense attorney, at that - in anticipation of, or to help avoid, a criminal indictment.
Anybody know about this? Is it true?
Someone ask Dutko, Haddad or Bogenschultz!!!
If any of them have been retained then the story is really getting ugly for Finkelstein. Does anybody know anything?
Here is some new information regarding Howard.
I was in the halls of the courthouse today and overheard a conversation wherein it was made clear that Finkelstein is looking to retain counsel for his defense of an anticipated criminal indictment.
I don't have any specifics, and the complaints were just recently filed, but a source said to me that there may be up to 4 people that are coming forward next week to sign sworn statements against Finkelstein. What about? I have no idea.
And today I was told that there may be a sexual harrassment case being considered or filed (not sure) against the PD's office for sexual harrassment and creating a hostile and violent work environment against one of the best lawyers in the office that works there because Finkelstein suspects her as being one of Arreaza's witnesses. A few other PD's are feeling the heat too and are getting tired of it... like me.
Anyone know more?
Williams lied to the newspaper, isn't even handling the case in which he claims gary was "under-qualified", and oh wait, who the f$*k is Russell Williams anyway... man, downward departure all over the courthouse. it is a new game, and the players are hot and ready to roll. COVER-UPS get exposed, people get in trouble, and new people rise... watch and learn... HF -- one word -- KARMA
Chicken Little aka Russell Williams is not above telling anybody anything as has been seen every time a judge sticks his foot in it, and especially to any newspaper, whether it's accurate or not is an entirely different question, but he would have run like the chicken he is at the sight of Ostrow.
Williams would definitely be in the know about being under qualified.
I guess Arreaza thinks he can pick up a few votes hanging out in the cafe. He'll need them. What's that, the new meeting place for the politically inclined or the mentally challenged? Is that where the new elite meet? What better group of losers to pick the courthouse cafe than Williams, Ostrow and Arreaza to discuss strategy. I've heard it all now.
Is it true that O'connor walked by and was cheering Russel to rip Ostrow's shirt off?
is that why aj paid him a token resititution paymenrt and the first month of his new office space deal, he was evicted for interfering with attorney's and their clients.? So all Ostrow has to do is admit his problem? Guy dont sound all that bad! you can verify aj's short stay at his foster home after he was forced out for theft, and taking advantage of Ostrow who trusting the guy who got every raise he ever requested, health, cell phone gas and a mentor. Ya think aj's kids know their father is a thief? check your facts before to talk out of your a** you must be some outstanding trial lawyer....am I right? hes won more trials in 2 years than youve tried in your career smart money says