Claris Law Legal Blogging Community

Name:

E-mail:

Phone Number:

Zip Code:

Your Question:

Editor: Will Hanlon & Charlie Lambert
Profession: Tampa Defense Attorneys

Category: Criminal Law

State v. F; Judge: Ronald Ficarrotta; Date: August 20, 2007

FACTS: The Client was charged with Aggravated Assault on a Code Inspector and Cruelty to Animals . The aggravated assault charge was a second degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in Florida State Prison. In September of 2006, animal control services (ACS) received a report regarding "loose dogs" at our client's place of business. After the animal control officer reported to the scene she asked the client where the dogs were being housed. The client led her to an area at the rear of the business where the dogs were chained to some fencing. During the investigation the officer ordered an employee at our client's business to move the dogs so she could take pictures. An arguement between the ACS officer and the client ensued. The defendant (client) picked up a wrench, called the ACS officer a "fucking bitch", and ordered her off the property. The ACS officer immediately called 911. Instead of leaving the property and calling police from the safety of her van, the officer stayed on the property, and antagonized the defendant.

After making numerous efforts to get the ACS officer to leave his property the defendant decided to leave. The ACS officer claimed that the defendant attempted to run her over on two separate occassions as he was leaving his property. Before the police could arrive the client left the scene because he felt that the police would arrest him based solely on the ACS officer's story. This decision led to the issuance of a warrant for his arrest a few days later. The defendant then contacted our office where we arranged a court date to surrender the defendant to the Court. The Court set a bond which the client quickly posted.

Animal Control Services took a very active role in the arrest, and subsequent prosecution of our client. It is important to realize that Animal Control Services works hand-in-hand with law enforcement and the state attorney's office on a constant basis. This relationship can make defending these types of cases very difficult.

Shorlty after retaining our office we began taking depositions of the alleged victim. Her story was contradicted in a number of different ways by the police report itself and statements she made to the 911 operator on the day of the incident.

DEFENSE: It is necessary in any assault case that the victim be put "in fear" by the actions of the defendant. The conduct of the ACS officer contradictied the idea that she was ever put in fear by our client.

RESULT: The Aggravated Assault charge was dismissed.

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS CHARGE

FACTS: The above charge of aggravated assault was filed in November of 2006. The animal cruelty charges were filed in January of 2007. Based on statements made by the ACS officer during deposition it appeared that she was not interested in filing any criminal charges related to the animals before the verbal altercation between her and the defendant. Animal Control Services decided sometime after the investigation for assault that additional charges of animal cruelty should be filed.

DEFENSE: We argued to the state that the charges were based more on our client's disregard for the ACS officer's authority than the facts listed in the police report.

RESULT: The Animal Cruelty Charges were Dismissed.