Recent Blog Posts

Florida's Stand Your Ground Law

David Faulkner — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:24:00 GMT

Orlando self-defense attorney David Faulkner represents and defends clients who have been accused of having committed violent criminal offenses in the Central Florida area, including but not limited to Orange County, Seminole County, Osceola County, Lake County and Volusia County. One of the defenses available to an individual who has been accused of having committed a violent offense is that the accused acted in self-defense. Florida is one of the states that has enacted the so-called stand your ground law, which garnered tremendous scrutiny in relation to the tray Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman case. That law allows an individual to stand and defend themself under certain circumstances without having a duty to retreat, as is required in some states. Relevant portions of that law are as follows:

776.012. Use of force in defense of person

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to Section 776.013.

776.013. Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in Section 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

776.032. Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in Section 6.012, Section 776.013, or Section 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in Section 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

HOW SELF-DEFENSE ATTORNEY DAVID FAULKNER CAN HELP YOU

Orlando self-defense attorney David Faulkner is a former state prosecutor and former FBI Special Agent. As such, attorney Faulkner is experienced with regard to the proper and justified use of force in defense of one's self or the defense of others. If you or someone you know have been charged with a violent offense and believe that you were acting in self-defense or in the defense of someone else, then attorney Faulkner can help you evaluate your case and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of your defense. Attorney Faulkner can also interact with law enforcement and the applicable prosecuting authority to advocate on your behalf with regard to your claim of self-defense.

Do not delay. If you need help with your self-defense claim, contact Orlando self-defense attorney David Faulkner today for an FREE CONSULTATION. The right to self-defense is an important right that all Floridians have. That right should be vigorously defended.

Burden of proof in Florida violation of probation cases

David Faulkner — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:43:00 GMT

Orlando violation of probation defense attorney David Faulkner represents individuals accused of a variety of state criminal charges, whether a misdemeanor or a felony, and accusations of violation of probation in relation thereto. No violation of probation matter is too small or too large for attorney Faulkner to assist you with. Whether you are a tourist or a local resident, or your violation of probation case is a simple technical violation or as severe as a violation based on allegations that a new crime was committed, we can help. Contact Orlando violation of probation defense attorney David Faulkner today for a FREE CONSULTATION.

STANDARD/BURDEN OF PROOF IS LOWER IN A VIOLATION OF PROBATION CASE

In order to convict an individual of a criminal offense, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime in question was committed and that individual accused of the crime is the person that committed it. The standard of beyond a reasonable doubt is one of the highest legal burdens of proof in our system of justice. However, in a violation of probation case, in order to prove that an individual violated their probation, the government's burden of proof is much lower, in that the government must only show by a preponderance of the evidence (also referred to as the greater weight of the evidence) that the individual willfully and substantially violated one of their conditions of probation. Since the burden of proof is much lower in a violation of probation case than it is in a case where the government is trying to prove that a crime was committed, there have been cases where individuals charged with having violated their probation by committing a new crime have been found innocent by a jury of the alleged new crime, only to still have their probation violated using the lower standard of proof.

Orlando violation of probation attorney David Faulkner is often asked if a violation of probation based upon a new criminal offense having been allegedly committed will be dismissed if the new alleged criminal offense itself is dropped by the government or a jury finds a verdict of not guilty. The answer to that question is that the dismissal or verdict of not guilty regarding the new alleged criminal offense certainly raises the prospect that the violation of probation case that is based upon that new alleged criminal offense will be dropped by the government. However, such a result is by no means guaranteed, as the government sometimes proceeds with the violation of probation knowing that the burden of proof in the violation of probation case is lower.

HOW CAN ORLANDO VIOLATION OF PROBATION ATTORNEY DAVID FAULKNER HELP YOU IN A VIOLATION OF PROBATION CASE?

If you have been charged or think you will be charged with having violated your probation, then you should contact Orlando violation of probation attorney David Faulkner right away. There are several steps that an experienced violation of probation attorney may be able take to assist you in your case.

Your attorney may be able to contact your probation officer to discuss the possibility of giving you further time to cure any deficiency in complying with your conditions of probation or for you to take additional steps to ensure that the violation will not occur in the future. For example, your probation officer may be willing to give you additional time to complete your community service hours if your probation officer sees that you are actively and diligently trying to complete the hours. As another example, if your probation officer is considering violating your probation based upon a positive drug test, your probation officer may be willing to forgo filing a violation of probation affidavit if you agree to submit yourself to a substance abuse evaluation and thereafter follow any recommended counseling and avoid any further positive drug tests. The first step in trying to get your probation officer to work with you instead of violating you, maybe to have your experienced violation of probation attorney open a dialogue with your probation officer to discuss the possibilities. In short, it never hurts to ask. In the end, your probation officer may be unwilling to work with you and will file an affidavit of violation of probation despite the best efforts of your attorney. On the other hand, your probation officer, if approached in the right manner, might be willing to give you a further chance to correct the problem.

Experienced Orlando violation of probation attorney David Faulkner may be able to arrange a court date for you to appear to turn yourself in as to the pending violation of probation warrant. At that hearing, attorney Faulkner may be able to request that a bond be assigned to your violation of probation case so that you can be released while the case is pending. Alternatively, attorney Faulkner may be able to negotiate a resolution of the allegations so that you can resolve the violation of probation case at the arranged court hearing, with the primary goal being to avoid incarceration. You should know, however, that many courts take the position that they will not address a violation of probation matter until after the individual accused of having violated their probation surrenders to authorities or is otherwise taken into custody.

Orlando violation of probation attorney David Faulkner may be able to coordinate with law enforcement and/or the prosecuting authority to arrange a date for a person accused of having violated their probation to voluntarily turn himself in as to the violation of probation warrant. Having the accused turn himself/herself in voluntarily sends a message to the court that the accused will address the violations in a responsible manner, thereby making it more likely that the court will be willing to issue a bond with regard to the violation of probation case. Further, having the accused turned himself/herself in voluntarily enables the accused to pick the time and place for the arrest, thereby avoiding the embarrassment and trauma of having law enforcement arrest the accused at his or her residence, place of employment or other sensitive location. Additionally, attorney Faulkner could then attend the accused's initial appearance, which will occur within 24 hours of the arrest. At the initial appearance, attorney Faulkner may be able to request that the accused be released on bond.

Contacting experienced Orlando violation of probation attorney David Faulkner early in the process may also allow attorney Faulkner the opportunity to advise the person who is or will be accused of violating their probation as to steps the accused may take to potentially better their outcome. For example, early intervention may give attorney Faulkner the opportunity to advise the accused to enroll in classes or other counseling that may later send a message to the court that the accused is doing what they can to address the situation.

Contacting experienced Orlando violation of probation attorney David Faulkner early in the process may further give attorney Faulkner the ability to gather evidence on behalf of the accused. Sometimes, the incarceration of an individual accused of having violated their probation limits the ability of the accused to assist in the gathering of evidence that may be favorable to their cause. As a result, early intervention by attorney Faulkner may be able to assist in the identification and gathering of evidence while the accused is not incarcerated and can, therefore, assist in the evidence identification and gathering process.

If you, a family member, a friend, relative or other loved one is facing a violation of probation allegation, then contact experienced Orlando violation of probation attorney David Faulkner today for a FREE CONSULTATION. Attorney Faulkner represents individuals accused of violations of probation in the Central Florida area, including, but not limited to, cases in Orange County, Seminole County, Osceola County, Lake County and Volusia County. Do not delay, time is of the essence.

Divorce mediation.

David Faulkner — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:22:00 GMT

Faulkner Legal Group, P.A., an Orlando divorce law firm, handles a variety of divorce related issues in the Orlando, Central Florida and surrounding areas as well as the State of Florida as a whole. As an Orlando divorce lawyer, attorney David A. Faulkner represents clients with regard to divorce related mediations.

Mediation is an alternative to litigation that may help you and your spouse avoid the emotional and financial costs of litigation.

A mediator is a neutral party that assists you and your spouse or former spouse in attempting to resolve disputed issues regarding your divorce. Those disputed issues may arise before, during or after a divorce. Mediation is an informal process that allows you and your spouse or former spouse to have control to reach an agreement resolving all or some of the disputed issues.

MAJOR ADVANTAGES OF MEDIATION

Control - You and your spouse decide what issues to settle, and with how much detail and flexibility given your individual interests and goals.

Certainty of Outcome - More certainty in the outcome of your case because you, the parties, reach the decisions. In other word, a trial will lead to a certain outcome, but the exact outcome is unknown to you until the judge renders a decision on all issues in the case. Of course, if a judge decides the outcome of your case, you may not like the decision. Short of appeal, you may then be stuck with an outcome that does not serve you or your family's interests.

Confidentiality - Subject to certain exceptions provided by law, communication in mediation is confidential. The mediating parties can freely engage in discussions to reach an agreement without having to worry that anything either of you say during the negotiations may later be used against you in court. Thus, if you make an offer to resolve your dispute during the mediation process, your spouse or former spouse could not then tell the judge that you had made the offer, even if you take a very different position in court than you did during mediation. Of course, unless you and your spouse agree otherwise, the agreement itself (if you reach one) is usually not confidential and is filed with the court.

Save on Legal and Other Litigation Costs - Since you and your spouse can work out an agreement, you save on legal fees and expenses, including the fees of other experts who may need to testify in court to resolve some issues.

WHERE TO GET LEGAL HELP?

The list above is by no means an exhaustive enumeration of the benefits of mediation. If you have Florida divorce related disputed issues you would like to mediate, then contact Faulkner Legal Group, P.A. so that Orlando Divorce lawyer David A. Faulkner can inform you of your legal rights. Having an experienced Florida family law lawyer by your side at mediation would help ensure that you know the pros and cons of any mediation proposals. Call today.

State's destruction of evidence- Due Process violation.

David Faulkner — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:00:00 GMT

Orlando, Florida criminal defense attorney David A. Faulkner represents clients with regard to a variety of criminal charges. In some cases, Mr. Faulkner has determined through his investigative work that the Government lost or destroyed critical evidence that might have helped to prove the client's innocence with regard to the criminal charge the client was facing.

Recently, a client was accused of having committed a burglary. The only evidence against the client was a single fingerprint identified as that of the client found on an item located at the scene of the burglary. However, law enforcement failed to preserve the item on which the fingerprint was found. The defense in the case was that the accused had frequented the location of the burglary on many occasions in the course of lawful activities and that the fingerprint on the item in question was from such a lawful visit to the location rather than from the occasion of the burglary. The alleged victim claimed, however, that the item in question would have been placed at the location of the burglary only after the accused had had any occasion to lawfully be on the premises. As a result, the item on which the fingerprint had been found was a critical part of the defense case.

When the Government loses or destroys evidence, there may be a due process violation of law. To show such a due process violation of law, the accused must demonstrate that the item that was failed to be preserved by the Government would have been exculpatory (meaning that it would have demonstrated the accused's innocence or would have assisted in impeaching the credibility of a material witness or called into question material evidence). If the accused can demonstrate that the evidence in question would have been exculpatory if preserved, then there has been a due process violation of law and the case may be dismissed or other remedies such as the exclusion of evidence may be appropriate.

If the accused can only demonstrate that the evidence MIGHT have been exculpatory if preserved, then the accused must meet the further burden of demonstrating that the Government acted in BAD FAITH by not preserving the evidence.

In the situation referenced above, the court found that the evidence in question might have been exculpatory to the accused and that the Government acted in bad faith. As a result, the Government was disallowed the use of the fingerprint against the accused and the case was ultimately dropped by the Government.

If you, a friend, a family member or other loved one is facing a criminal charge and need assistance, then contact Faulkner Legal Group, P.A. today for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Do I need/should I sign a prenuptial agreement?

David Faulkner — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 17:19:00 GMT

Whether to have prepared or to sign a prenuptial agreement is both a financial and emotional decision. In Florida, prenuptial agreements (sometimes referred to as premarital agreements) are governed by Section 61.079, Florida Statutes.

Marriage is as much a financial contract as it is an emotional or religious undertaking. Marriage does have financial consequences should the marriage end in divorce. Under Florida law, there is a presumption that assets or liabilities created during the marriage are marital regardless of the spouse's name associated with the asset or liability. Further, it is presumed, absent reasons to the contrary, that marital assets and liabilities should be divided equally between the parties. For example, a bank account that is funded by a spouse's employment earnings during the marriage is presumed to be marital property that should be equally divided between the parties. Another common example are retirement accounts that are funded during the marriage with a spousal employment earnings during the marriage are marital assets to the extent so funded. Likewise, a student loan incurred by a spouse during the marriage is considered a marital liability that should presumably be divided equally between the parties. Marriage and a subsequent divorce also creates the posibility that one spouse may be ordered to pay the other spouse alimony/spousal support.

A prenuptial agreement is a contract entered into by a couple intent on marriage. Such an agreement can specify in advance what property will be marital or nonmarital should the couple go through with the marriage. A prenuptial agreement can also specify whether alimony will or will not be allowed should the marriage end in divorce and, if alimony is allowed pursuant to the prenuptial agreement, under what circumstances and to what extent.

Prenuptial agreements must be entered into by the parties knowing, freely and voluntarily. To enter into a prenuptial agreement knowingly, each party must fully understand the terms of the agreement and must have an accurate understanding of the other prospective spouse's financial situation. Further, there can be no coercion in getting a prospective spouse to sign the agreement.

Orlando family law attorney David A. Faulkner prepares and reviews prenuptial agreements for clients. It is important that a prenuptial agreement be prepared by an experienced attorney because the agreement must stand the test of time. There are a great many variables that must be taken into consideration. It is best not to sign such an agreement without having an attorney review and explain the consequences of the agreement. Having a family law lawyer prepare and/or review a prenuptial agreement increases the likelihood that the agreement will be valid should the marriage end in divorce.

If you need a prenuptial agreement prepared or reviewed, contact Orlando family law attorney David A. Faulkner today. Attorney Faulkner will be able to prepare or review your prenuptial agreement so that you can fully understand the agreements consequences.

The police stopped/detained me. Were they allowed to do that?

David Faulkner — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 17:13:00 GMT

There are three types of law enforcement contacts with citizens, consensual encounters, temporary detentions and arrests.

A consensual encounter occurs when the law enforcement officer merely engages in conversation with a citizen without a show of authority. No facts must be established to justify such a consensual encounter. The citizen can end the encounter at any time and may choose to remain silent, choosing to simply ignore the law enforcement officer.

A temporary detention occurs when a law enforcement officer restrains a citizen's freedom of movement for a temporary period of time to conduct an investigation. To temporarily detain a citizen, the law enforcement officer must establish facts sufficient to prove that he or she has a reasonable suspicion to believe that the person had committed, was committing or was about to commit a crime. If the law enforcement officer determines, after conducting an investigation, That the person has not committed a crime, then the law enforcement officer must allow the person to go free. A citizen who has been temporarily detained has the right to remain silent and to not answer the law enforcement officer's questions.

The Florida Supreme Court has described the standard of reasonable suspicion as follows:

. . . [T]he totality of the circumstances-the whole picture-must be taken into account. Based upon that whole picture the detaining officers must have a particularized and objective basis for suspecting the particular person stopped of criminal activity.
. . . The analysis proceeds with various objective observations . . . and consideration of the modes or patterns of operation of certain kinds of lawbreakers. From these data, a trained officer draws inferences and makes deductions . . . that might well elude an untrained person.
The process does not deal with hard certainties, but with probabilities. . . Finally, the evidence thus collected must be seen and weighed not in terms of library analysis by scholars, but as understood by those versed in the field of law enforcement.

To make an arrest, a law enforcement officer must establish facts sufficient to prove that he or she has probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and that the person being arrested and committed the crime. A law enforcement officer can establish probable cause to arrest a citizen if the totality of the circumstances supports reasonable grounds of suspicion that are sufficiently strong to warrant a reasonable and cautious person to believe that a crime was committed and that the person being arrested committed the crime.

If a law enforcement officer makes a temporary detention or an arrest without having sufficient facts to justify the temporary detention or arrest, then any evidence obtained as a result cannot be used to prosecute the person against whom the evidence is offered.

Orlando criminal defense lawyer David Faulkner is experienced at identifying whether or not law enforcement acted improperly in making a temporary detention or an arrest. Contact us today for a FREE CONSULTATION to discuss the particular facts in your case.

Understanding actual versus constructive possession of contraband in Orlando, Florida.

David Faulkner — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 20:27:00 GMT

Orlando Florida criminal defense attorney David A. Faulkner represents individuals accused of a variety of state and federal crimes related to the possession of contraband such as firearms, weapons or drugs, whether a misdemeanor or a felony. No criminal matter is too small or too large for attorney Faulkner to assist you with.

Possession of contraband such as an illegal drug can be actual or constructive. For example, if the the contraband is found on the accused, such as in their pocket, then the possession would be actual possession. However, a person can be found to have have possession of a drug for purposes of criminal prosecution even if the drug is not located by law enforcement on the person's body. This is accomplished pursuant to the legal theory of constructive possession. A person can be found to be in constructive possession of illegal contraband such as a drug if the person has knowledge of the presence and nature of the contraband and is exercising dominion and control over the contraband.

Constructive possession of a drug often becomes an issue when the drug is located by law enforcement in a vehicle that is occupied by multiple people. In such a circumstance, the question becomes who, if anyone, should be held responsible for the presence of the drug. In order to successfully prosecute a single individual in such a circumstance, the prosecution must be able to show that the individual within the vehicle for whom they are trying to hold responsible for the presence of the drug had knowledge of the presence of the drug and was exercising dominion or control over the drug.

Knowledge of the presence and nature of illegal contraband can be proven in a variety of ways. One of the ways knowledge can be proven is if the individual accused of possessing the contraband admits that a new the contraband was present. Knowledge of the presence of illegal contraband can also be inferred if the contraband is in plain sight to the individual accused. Knowledge can also be proven through the testimony of other individuals in the vehicle or if fingerprints or other such identifying physical evidence is located on the container housing the contraband.

Even if knowledge of the presence and nature of the illegal contraband can be proven, the prosecution must also establish that the accused exercised dominion and control over the contraband in question. For example, it is possible for a back seat passenger to have knowledge of the driver's possession of the contraband, while not having the ability to exercise dominion or control over the contraband. Dominion and control over contraband for which the accused has knowledge can also be established in a variety of ways. Certainly, if the accused's fingerprints are found on the container housing the contraband, then dominion and control over the contraband can be inferred. Also, the proximity of the contraband to the accused who has knowledge of its presence can also go towards the issue of whether or not the accused exercised dominion and control over the contraband.

If you, a friend or a family member are charged with a contraband related crime, then Orlando Florida criminal defense attorney David A. Faulkner can help. Contact Faulkner Legal Group, PA today to schedule your FREE CONSULTATION.

Understanding parental relocation in Orlando Florida.

David Faulkner — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 20:24:00 GMT

During or after a divorce, paternity or legal separation case, it is often that the parent with whom the minor children reside the majority of the time seeks to relocate within Florida or even out of the state. It is not always as easy as the parent just relocating, because the other parent's time-sharing rights may be substantially affected by the move.

Before such relocation, the parent seeking to relocate may be required to comply with Florida's parental relocation statute, which is found in Section 61.13001, Florida Statutes. Failure to comply with the statute may cause the parent seeking to relocate to be prohibited from doing so with the minor children. If the parent relocates with the minor children without following the requirements of Section 61.13001, the court may require the return of the minor children and may impose other sanctions.

If you have a Florida divorce, paternity or legal separation case or related modification that involves parental relocation with the minor children, then contact Faulkner Legal Group, P.A. so that Orlando Divorce, paternity and legal separation lawyer David A. Faulkner can inform you of your legal rights. Call today.

Can the State prosecute an accused for domestic violence if the alleged victim does not want to prosecute?

David Faulkner — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:45:00 GMT

Orlando Florida criminal defensedomestic violence attorney David Faulkner has represented many clients accused of domestic violence related criminal charges. One of the questions frequently asked is whether or not the State can prosecute a domestic violence criminal charge if the alleged victim does not want to prosecute and wants to drop the charges.

This situation frequently arises in situations where a spouse or significant other has accused their spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend, as the case may be, of having committed an act of domestic violence against them. After initially reporting the alleged act of domestic violence the accusing spouse or significant other has a change of heart and does not want to prosecute. Or, as is often the case, the accusing spouse or significant other may not have wanted to prosecute in the first place, but merely contacted law enforcement for the purpose of trying to calm a hostile situation down, only to find that there spouse or significant other is arrested.

The short answer is that the State may in fact prosecute the accused even if the accuser does not wish to proceed with the charges and wants to drop the case. The State is able to continue with the prosecution because in Florida crimes are technically considered to be offenses committed against the State of Florida rather than merely the individual making the accusation.

However, if the alleged victim does not want to prosecute, then the chances of the State discontinuing the prosecution by dropping the charges becomes much more likely to occur. Orlando Florida criminal defense domestic violence attorney David Faulkner is often able to get the alleged victim of domestic violence to execute what is known as a "declination of prosecution." A declination of prosecution is a usually sworn document that officially communicates to the State and the court that the alleged victim does not wish to prosecute. Such a declination of prosecution will often also contain statements from the alleged victim that may indicate that the accused did not commit the crime alleged.

Whether the State does or does not continue with the prosecution against the alleged victim's wishes, often depends upon whether or not there are any independent witnesses to the alleged offense. If there is an independent witness (i.e., a witness who has no bias for interest in the case) who observed the alleged act of domestic violence, then it may be more likely that the State will pursue the charges since they have a witness other than the alleged victim. If there is any physical evidence of the alleged act of domestic violence, such as video, photographic or other such evidence, then the State may also be more likely to pursue the charges against the wishes of the alleged victim.

It is important that the accused not pressure the alleged victim to drop the charges. This is because such pressure applied to the alleged victim might be considered to constitute a criminal offense of tampering with a witness. It is, therefore, best to let an experienced Orlando Florida criminal defense domestic violence attorney such as David Faulkner to handle such a delicate discussion with the alleged victim. If you, a friend or a family member are involved in such a domestic violence case, then contact Faulkner Legal Group, P.A. today to schedule a FREE CONSULTATION.

Basis of modifying child time-sharing in Florida - substantial change in circumstances.

David Faulkner — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:04:00 GMT

Orlando family law divorce and paternity attorney David A. Faulkner has represented many clients who either wanted to modify or fought modification of the child time-sharing arrangement previously ordered in their divorce or paternity cases. It is important and helpful to understand the standard of law that must be met prior to a court granting a modification of time-sharing.

Before a court can modify a time-sharing arrangement that was previously ordered by the court, the court must have either the agreement of the parties involved or the party seeking the modification of time-sharing must prove with competent evidence that there has been a substantial change in circumstances since the original time-sharing order sought to be modified was entered by the court. Such a substantial change in circumstances must be one that was not contemplated at the time the order to be modified was entered and must be one that was not voluntarily created by the party seeking the modification. Finally, the requested modification of time-sharing must be in the best interests of the child.

An example would be helpful in illustrating what a substantial change in circumstances might look like. Take for instance a child time-sharing schedule that was originally ordered based upon the fact that the mother of the child in question was able to spend more time with the child than the father whose job required him to spend substantial time traveling away from his area of residence. Approximately one year after the original child time-sharing order was entered, the father, through no fault of his own, loses his job. After searching for a new job, the father is able to locate work not previously available that does not require such frequent travel as was the case at the time of the original order. Such a circumstance could be characterized as a substantial change in circumstances. Further, the change in circumstances was not one that was contemplated at the time the original time-sharing order was entered and it was not a situation that was voluntarily created by the father. Finally, the modification of time-sharing allowing the father to have more time with the child could arguably be in the child's best interest assuming that the father is a responsible, competent and loving parent.

In order to seek a modification of time-sharing based upon a substantial change in circumstances, the first step is the filing of a supplemental petition to modify time-sharing. If you, a friend or a family member are seeking a modification of time-sharing or are fighting against such a modification of time-sharing experienced Orlando Florida family law divorce and paternity attorney David A. Faulkner may be able to assist. Contact Faulkner Legal Group, P.A. today to schedule an appointment for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Welcome to our Criminal Defense and Family Law Blog

Orlando Attorney — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:39:00 GMT

We are pleased to announce the launch of our Criminal Defense and Family Law Blog with an RSS feed available at Blog/Entire-Blog-Feed/RSS.xml