Jacksonville Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

In Jacksonville, Florida, can the State of Florida charge an individual with both Dealing in Stolen Property and Grand Theft of the same property, and if so, can the jury return a guilty verdict on both counts?

In Kiss v. Florida, the Fourth District Court of Appeals address this question. Leslie Kiss was charged with three counts of dealing in stolen property and one count of grand theft of the same property in connection with one scheme or course of conduct. The Florida court ruled that the State of Florida is free to charge a Defendant with both offenses, but the trier of fact must choose to convict one charge or the other, but not both. The court ruled in this manner due to the language of Florida Statute Section 812.025 which states:

"a single indictment or information may, under proper circumstances, charge theft and dealing in stolen property in connection with one scheme or course of conduct in separate counts that may be consolidated for trial, but the trier of fact may return a guilty verdict on one or the other, but not both, of the counts."

If you have been charged with Dealing in Stolen Property and/or Grand Theft, contact a Jacksonville Criminal Defense Lawyer at (904) 685-1200, extension 103.

In Jacksonville, Florida, a police officer must have probable cause to arrest a person. However, police can conduct a consensual encounter with an individual without probable cause. Therefore, it is very important to review any kind of police contact to determine if it is a consensual encounter or illegal police detention.

For example, the Florida Supreme Court visited this issue on July 8, 2010. In

Caldwell v. Florida, an officer accused Mr. Caldwell of Florida Burglary. The officer read him his Miranda rights, after which Caldwell asked if he was under arrest. The officer stated that he was not under arrest but the officer needed to ask him some questions. The officer asked Caldwell to ride with him to view the surveillance tape where the burglary took place, and Caldwell agreed. The officer frisked Mr. Cadwell, prior to him entering the car. After arriving at the site of the burglary, but before he saw the tape, Caldwell confessed to the officer.

The Supreme Court of Florida held that Miranda warnings do not result in a seizure as a matter of law. Instead, when it comes to a 4th Amendment seizure analysis, a Miranda warning should be analyzed through the totality of the circumstances and not be the dispositive factor in that analysis.

The Court set forth the following four-factors to determine whether a reasonable person would consider himself to be in custody under the totality of the circumstances:

1. The manner in which the police summon the suspect for questioning;
2. The purpose, place, and manner of the interrogation;
3. The extent that the suspect is confronted with evidence of guilt; and
4. Whether the suspect is informed that he is free to leave.

If you have been arrest in Jacksonville, Florida, contact a Jacksonville Criminal Defense Lawyer at (904) 685-1200, extension 103.  Your arrest may have been based on a violation of your 4th Amendment rights.