Articles Posted in Gun Crimes in Jacksonville

No charges will be filed in a Jacksonville Beach shooting that killed a member of a motorcycle gang. Prosecutors said the man who fired the shot was attacked by at least three men and pulled out a gun and fired a shot to end the attack, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. That shot hit one of his attackers in the head, killing him, the newspaper reported. The announcement comes more than four months after the June shooting, which prosecutors said stemmed from a planned confrontation between two rival motorcycle gangs, the newspaper reported.

The man who fired the shot had a broken nose, but prosecutors inferred it would have been much worse had he not ended the beating by firing a shot. Florida law allows a person to use deadly force if he or she feels in eminent danger of serious bodily injury or death. It’s often known as the Stand Your Ground Law, and is often claimed but less often accepted in court as a reason for a shooting. But this Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case did not get that far because prosecutors chose not to file charges in the case. The shooter in this case immediately gave his gun to a friend following the attack, who unloaded it before handing it over to police, the newspaper reported. The shooter, who had a concealed weapons permit to legally carry the gun, does not have a criminal record and voluntarily spoke to police after the shooting, according to the newspaper.

Speaking to police after an incident can be dangerous and could lead to criminal charges, but it is natural for people to want to explain themselves – especially in an incident where a person is accused of killing another person. In this Jacksonville Violent Crimes Case, it worked out for the shooter, and was the right decision for the state to make. Once charges are filed, it can be difficult for the state to walk away from them – especially in a Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case like this where it was investigated for more than four months. Police were tight-lipped on this case for months, despite media attention and protests from the victim’s family demanding information and justice. Prosecutors would have needed to be able to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, and clearly did not believe they could in this Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case.

When Michael Dunn is tried a second time next year on a first-degree murder charge, his attorney is requesting the high profile case be tried outside of Jacksonville. A motion was filed this month asking for a change of venue when the state tries Dunn again on the one count the jury couldn’t agree on earlier this year, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. Dunn said he feared for his life when he opened fire on a car of teenagers at a Southside gas station, killing a 17-year-old, the newspaper reported. Dunn went to trial earlier this year and his case was followed closely by national and local media. He was convicted on three counts of attempted murder for the shooting at the three teens in the car who survived, but the jury could not come to agreement on whether Dunn was guilty of first-degree murder in the teen’s death.

Dunn, 49, faces a mandatory 20 years on each of the three counts, so he will be in prison for at least 60 years. Because these are mandatory sentences, they must be served consecutively and in their entirety without a change of gained time for good behavior. So he would be released when he is 109, meaning he’s likely already serving a life sentence. Despite that prospect, the state is pushing forward with another trial that will be expensive to taxpayers and put the city in the national spotlight again. The first trial garnered gavel-to-gavel news coverage, so his attorney has a legitimate point that the media coverage could taint a potential jury pool.

The change of venue request in this Jacksonville Murder Case can be made in the “interest of justice” according to state statutes. Essentially that includes any elements that could prevent finding an impartial jury in the Jacksonville Murder Case, which could be whether jurors have heard about the case and already made a decision one way or the other on if they feel Dunn is guilty. The requests are filed fairly regularly, but not often granted. Most murder trials are in the media prior to the case going to trial, and reading a story or watching a news progress does not preclude them from being fair and impartial on the jury. But the level of media attention in this case was as high as it has been for any case in recent years – and there will be more in advance of the trial as it gets closer. The ultimate responsibility of the justice system in any Jacksonville Criminal Case is for the defendant to have a fair trial in front of a jury of his or her peers. The role of a Jacksonville Criminal Defense Attorney to fight for a fair trial, including seeking to move the trial if there could be an issue with a local jury.

A jury convicted a Jacksonville woman of reduced charges in connection with her shooting into a car at a driver and her passengers. The charges have varied in this Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case that dates back to 2011. Ultimately, she was convicted of three counts of attempted manslaughter, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. Police said the woman fired shots from a pistol from her car at another vehicle and, when the other driver tried to escape, the woman continued to follow and continued to fire shots at the vehicle, according to the newspaper report.

The woman was first charged in 2011 with three counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in state prison, so a total of 15. Prosecutors then upgraded the charges to attempted murder, second-degree felonies, and those are the charges that were brought to the jury in this Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case. In the end, the jury found the woman was not guilty of attempted murder, but instead guilty of attempted manslaughter. In the grand scheme of things, there’s little difference in the bottom line. Florida’s 10-20-Life laws dictate the sentencing in the Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case anyway, though the jury doesn’t know that when they are deliberating on charges. Possible sentencing cannot be discussed in front of the jury because it could sway their opinion. The case is to be judged solely on the facts alone, not on any potential punishment. In Florida, prosecutors can choose to apply the 10-20-Life laws related to gun crimes and the minimum mandatory sentences that go with them. When applied, a person can receive a 10-year minimum sentence for showing a gun during the commission of a felony. The 20-year minimum mandatory applies when a gun is fired and the life sentence can come in when someone is hit.

These minimum penalties have been highly scrutinized and there has been some movement in the state legislature to give more latitude to judges, but for now these are the laws that apply in Jacksonville Gun Crimes Cases. One of the biggest issues with these sentences is that judges have ruled they must be applied consecutively. In this Jacksonville Gun Crimes case, the woman was convicted of three counts. So each 20-year sentence must be severed separately, meaning she has a mandatory sentence of 60 years in state prison. In most cases, judges have the discretion to run the sentences concurrently, means all three 20-years sentences at once so the total sentence is only 20 years. So while the reduced charge sounds good, it ultimately means the same lengthy prison sentence as the murder charge.

A new state law allows judges to veer from the Florida’s strict 10-20-Life laws if it can be proven that a person fired a warning shot because he or she was in fear of death or imminent great bodily harm. The change expands the state’s Stand Your Ground law to allow people to show a gun and fire a warning shot if they feel threatened, just as a person can use deadly force in a similar situation, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. Before the law change, someone who fired a warning shot could be charged with aggravated assault with a firearm and, because a gun was fired, faced a minimum mandatory sentence of 20 years in state prison.

A Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case was one of the reasons a South Florida lawmaker said he sponsored the bill, the newspaper reported. A Jacksonville woman was convicted of three counts of aggravated assault, and sentenced to 20 years in state prison, for firing what she says was a warning shot to scare off her estranged husband. Two of his children were present at the time, hence the two additional charges. Her conviction was overturned by an appellate court, so she is now awaiting a second trial in her Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case. Police and prosecutors contend that Jacksonville Gun Crimes Case wasn’t a true warning shot, proof that you will still encounter similar disagreements in court on whether the law applies. Many in law enforcement have been generally supportive of the new bill because it helps clarify what is legal when it comes to self-defense, the newspaper reported, and because it protects people who are legally defending themselves.

From a sentencing and adjudication perspective, it essentially gets discretion back into the hands of judges, who are elected and appointed to make these decisions, which is a good thing. Anytime there’s a hard and fast rule without room for interpretation, there’s a risk of a sentencing not matching up with the actual crime, given the circumstances. Not all Jacksonville Gun Crimes Cases are exactly alike, and judges should be able to take all of the facts into consideration and make the best decision in terms of sentencing. Under Florida’s 10-20-Life law, anyone who displays a gun during the commission of a felony can be sentenced to an automatic 10 years in state prison. If a gun is fired, a 20-year minimum mandatory sentence is applied. If someone is shot during the felony, the defendant would receive a mandatory life sentence if convicted. This new law does not prevent judges from imposing severe sentences in Jacksonville Gun Crimes Cases, it simply allows discretion in cases where it makes sense.

Rather than face a trial and the possibility of the death penalty, a Jacksonville woman pleaded guilty this month to killing her ex-boyfriend last year. Arianne Myles was accused of shooting her ex-boyfriend outside a Jacksonville post office, shortly after learning the man was engaged to another woman, the newspaper reported. Myles was charged with first-degree murder, which is only punishable by life in prison or the death penalty. Prosecutors were pursuing the death penalty against Myles, and the key element of this plea deal is that it takes the death penalty off the table. By pleading guilty to second-degree murder, the maximum penalty is life in prison. The death penalty can only be applied in first-degree murder cases.

And while it may appear to be a small victory for Myles, this is just another example of the state using the death penalty as a bargaining chip in a Jacksonville Murder Case. The inclination locally has been to charge first-degree murder, seek the death penalty and negotiate from there. It’s all part of the process, and the practice of starting a negotiation with one charge and bargaining it down to a reduced charge is not uncommon for many Jacksonville Felony Cases, even Jacksonville Misdemeanor Cases. But the death penalty is reserved for the most heinous of heinous crimes, and literally threatening someone with their life seems to be the new tactic in Jacksonville Murder Cases.

Myles was driving down a Jacksonville road when she saw her ex-boyfriend’s car in a post office parking lot, according to a report on News4Jax. She is accused of turning the car around, pulling into the parking lot, getting a gun from her glove compartment and killing him, the television station reported. The premeditation needed for first-degree murder does not need to be days or weeks of plotting, but could be met just in the time that Myles turned around and decided to go and shoot the victim. But would that have qualified this Jacksonville Murder Case as a death penalty case? At the end of the day, we won’t know. Myles is scheduled to be sentenced next month in this Jacksonville Murder Case. The maximum penalty is life in prison, but the plea agreement does leave it open that she could receive a sentence that would allow Myles, 23, to be released at some point. A very small percentage of Jacksonville Criminal Defense Cases end up in trial, so a key is often being able to negotiate the best possible outcome for the you or your loved one. Our Jacksonville Criminal Defense Attorney will thoroughly investigate the case so you can determine whether it makes sense to try to negotiate or to take the case to trial.

The man accused of shooting and killing a Jacksonville teen during an argument about loud music has settled civil lawsuits with the victim’s family and the families of other teens in the car at the time of the shooting. Michael Dunn has settled lawsuits with the parents of Jordan Davis and two other teens in the car when Davis was killed in November 2012, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. Davis and the others had their music turned up at a Gate gas station when Dunn and the teens got into an argument, the newspaper reported. Dunn shot into the vehicle several times, killing Davis, the newspaper reported. Dunn has said all along that one of the teens pointed a gun out of the car, but police have said there were no weapons found.

Among the claims of Davis’ parents was that Dunn contributed to their pain and suffering by suggesting that Davis was violent, the newspaper reported. The monetary terms of the settlement were not made public. It is rare that civil suits would be resolved before the criminal trial. Typically, these cases play out after the criminal trial – partially because a criminal conviction can be used to bolster the civil case. But, in this Jacksonville Murder Case, the chronology is less important. First of all, the civil settlement CANNOT be used in Dunn’s criminal trial in his Jacksonville Murder Case. One thing it could do, since the case has been covered extensively by local, state and even national media, is confuse potential jurors about Dunn’s guilt, but that could be sorted out in jury selection. Another reason the timing doesn’t matter is that Dunn has never denied shooting into the car, has never denied that he was the one that killed Davis.

The criminal issue in this Jacksonville Murder Case is whether or not Dunn acted in self-defense, and that will be the crux of the criminal trial scheduled to begin Feb. 3. The issue will be whether jurors believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Dunn fired into the car on his own and was not defending himself from the shotgun he said he saw out the window of the vehicle. While there is always hesitation to admit any wrongdoing in advance of a criminal trial, there could be a variety of reasons to wrap up the civil case early. Dunn’s finances have been contested from the start of the case – his criminal defense attorney has asked the judge repeatedly to order the state to cover investigative costs – so that could be a factor. Another could be to get the dispute with Davis’ family cleared up so they are more likely to be on board with a plea agreement for Dunn if there is one in the works. Regardless of the reason, the criminal trial is sure to get plenty of media coverage in this Jacksonville Murder Case. And while readers and viewers will know the civil cases have been settled, jurors will not. And that’s what really matters in this Jacksonville Murder Case.

A student at St. Augustine High School was arrested last month for allegedly bringing a gun into school and now faces criminal charges as well as significant discipline from the St. Johns County School Board. A concerned student told teachers the teen might have a gun and the staff alerted a deputy assigned to the school, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. When approached, the student said he did have a gun in his bag, which was underneath his desk, the newspaper reported. The accused student never displayed the gun, nor did he threaten any students, teachers or other staff with the weapon, the newspaper reported.

In Florida, the state makes the guidelines for facing criminal charges in all cases including this St. Johns County Gun Crimes Case but, in the case of guns in schools, also has a law that determines the length of an expulsion. Any student bringing a firearm into a school or school event is automatically expelled from school for one year. Now, the school district has the discretion to place the student in an alternative school or a disciplinary program, but the student cannot return to his or her school for at least one full year. The term is for a full calendar year, not just a school year, which is the length of time many think of when it comes to school discipline.

On the criminal side of this St. Johns County Juvenile Crimes case, the third-degree felony charge has a maximum penalty of five years in prison. The age and criminal history of the student were not available in the newspaper report, but they will both play a significant role in the punishment the student receives in this St. Johns County Gun Crimes case. In some St. Johns County Juvenile Crimes Case, a teen will be charged as an adult, and that is more likely in crimes when a gun is involved. In other St. Johns County Juvenile Crimes, the case will stay in the juvenile court system. When it does, there are varying degrees of incarceration for juveniles, from house arrest to minimum security detention facilities to what amounts to a juvenile version of the state prison. The point of juvenile sanctions should be to play a role in getting the student or teen on the right track. The school expulsion makes sense for the safety of the students and teachers at the school, especially given the rash of school shootings over the past several years. Our St. Johns County Juvenile Crimes Attorney will work to help negotiate a disposition that will allow the teen to continue some form of education and an opportunity to get on a track to graduate.

A judge has ordered a new trial for a Jacksonville man convicted of six counts of aggravated assault after a judge ruled an officer’s testimony crossed the line and may have influenced the jury. Randal Ratledge was convicted at trial earlier this year, accused of firing one shot into the air and another into a group of neighbors in August 2012, according to a report in the Florida Times-Union. No one was hurt and Ratledge has said he didn’t remember the incident and his Jacksonville criminal attorney argued Ratledge had a bad reaction to a sleeping pill.

During the trial, an officer testified that Ratledge told the officer “he made a mistake and did not want to talk about the incident,” the newspaper reported. Immediately after the comment was made, Ratledge’s Jacksonville Trial Attorney asked for a mistrial, but the judge denied the request and Ratledge was eventually found guilty by the jury, the newspaper reported. But the job of a Jacksonville Trial Attorney does not end there. Following a trial, there are other measures a Jacksonville Criminal Defense Attorney can take to work to get a new trial in the case. In this Jacksonville Gun Crimes case, the attorneys focused on the officer’s testimony and found previous cases that showed similar testimony resulted in the conviction being thrown out. The issue was that by saying what Ratledge said, the officer violated Ratledge’s Fifth Amendment right against incriminating himself.

Typically, these issues are handled in appellate courts and can come a year or more after the trial. Attorneys routinely file motions for new trials following a case. In this Jacksonville Gun Crimes case, the judge saw the error and ordered a new trial before Ratledge was sentenced to prison. He was facing a minimum mandatory sentence of 20 years in state prison and up to 120 years – 20 years for each of the six counts. At 56, much more than the minimum 20 years could end up effectively being a life sentence for Ratledge. Ratledge had been in jail awaiting sentencing, but will now have a hearing next month to determine if he can be released on bond until the second trial – or until the case resolves, whichever the case may be. It seems likely that there will be another trial – there’s nothing of consequence the state lost in terms of evidence. They’ll have to make sure the officer doesn’t say something similar on the stand, but prosecutors can essentially run the same case. This Jacksonville Gun Crimes case is a prime example of how a Jacksonville Trial Attorney’s work continues after the actual trial is complete – even after a conviction would seem to end the case.