CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Law Blog by Defense Lawyer John Floyd and Mr. Billy Sinclair

December 23, 2009

EXTRANEOUS OFFENSE EVIDENCE IN FEDERAL COURT

Filed under: Drug Defense Attorney — Tags: , , , — johntfloyd @ 6:30 am

Probative or Prejudicial:  Evidence of Previous Drug Convictions Admitted to Show Proof of Intent in Drug Case

By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

We have written recently about the dangers of the use of extraneous offense evidence at the state trial level; specifically, that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has virtually eliminated the availability of any defense in sexual assault cases, particularly those involving a child, when the State has in its possession extraneous offense evidence and the defendant wished to avoid its admission in court. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently confronted and outlined the parameters of extraneous offense evidence at the federal trial level.

The case involved John Matthew Cockrell who was convicted of conspiracy to possess and intent to distribute heroin resulting in bodily injury in violation of Title 21, Section 846, of the Federal Criminal Code. The Cockrell case began in 2006 when the Plano Police Department informed the FBI’s High Drug Trafficking Area about several heroin drug overdoses in Collin County, some of which were fatal. The FBI soon determined that Cockrell was the local heroin dealer behind the drug overdoses.

The federal investigation produced two co-conspirators who agreed to cooperate with the government. They testified at Cockrell’s conspiracy trial, telling the jury they bought drugs from Cockrell during a two-year span between 2005 and 2007. One of the co-conspirators told the jury that she initially bought methamphetamines from Cockrell but later switched to heroin with two or three buys a week. Prosecutors also presented the following evidence:

  • Witnesses testified they saw balloon-packaged heroin inside Cockrell’s apartment, car, and that he distributed the heroin to other dealers as well as customers.
  • Other witnesses testified they joined with Cockrell in purchasing large quantities of heroin both for their own personal use and distribution as well.
  • Two witnesses testified they overdosed on heroin supplied by Cockrell and required emergency room treatment. Their testimony was corroborated by treating paramedics and ambulance records. 1

(more…)

July 3, 2009

MICHAEL JACKSON’S DEATH, POTENTIAL CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Doctors Move to Hire Criminal Defense Attorney Vital in Protecting His Reputation and Liberty in the Jackson Whirlwind

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

The death of celebrity brings out the worst in humanity. The recent death of singer/entertainer Michael Jackson has once again proven this tragic point. We have seen it all before: the lurid headlines, anonymous sources, and grist mill of rumors all designed to insinuate wrongdoing by any and every one associated with the celebrity-figure from nanny to granny. To paraphrase American author Ann Morrow Lindberg, we make our heroes in America only to destroy them.

Michael Jackson was a phenomenal individual. His creative genius transcended even greatness. It was that creative genius that allowed him to survive child sexual molestation scandals, a seemingly endless array of medical problems, and nagging reports of a litany of drug addictions. The public will never know the whole truth about the private life of Michael Jackson. The purveyors of smut and misinformation will see to that. Mark Twain once said that a lie will travel around the world before the truth can put on its socks.

Dr. Conrad Murray, a cardiologist with practiced in Houston and Las Vegas, discovered the singer’s near lifeless body in the bedroom of the Los Angeles mansion where Jackson was living. The doctor performed CPR in an effort to revive Jackson and was present when Jackson was pronounced dead in the emergency room of the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. The doctor is discovering quickly that the media does not always get it right the first time.

Almost immediately media reports began to circulate linking Dr. Murray to injections of the narcotic drug Demerol (and now Morphine, Vicodin, Diprivan and who knows what else), prior to Jackson’s death. The reports were fueled by misinformation that Dr. Murray had mysteriously disappeared after reporting Jackson’s death; that he had refused to meet with Jackson family members; that he refused to sign a death certificate; and was even evading the police who wanted to discuss with him the timeline of events leading up to the singer’s death. (more…)

June 7, 2009

A GLIMPSE AT THE NATION’S DRUG PROBLEM

Filed under: Drug Defense Attorney — Tags: , , , , — johntfloyd @ 2:56 am

20:1 Crack/Powder Ratio Still Flawed; Incarceration of Most Drug Offenders Absurd and Obscene

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

In May 2007 the U.S. Sentencing Commission sent a report to Congress recommending that the 100:1 sentencing ratio in crack/powder cocaine cases be reduced to 20:1. The 100:1 ratio under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines required federal district courts to treat one gram of crack cocaine as the equivalent of 100 grams of powder cocaine. That disparate sentencing scheme created thousands of horrendous miscarriages of justice in the federal sentencing process with all sorts of ugly racial implications. Crack cocaine offenders, disproportionately African American, were routinely punished 100 times more severely than powder cocaine offenders.

In November 2007 Congress approved the 20:1 ratio amendment suggested by the Sentencing Commission—a modification designed to reduce the disparity between crack/powder cocaine sentences. But the official reasoning of the 20:1 ratio is just as flawed as was the 100:1 ratio. It just as offensive, with its inherent racial disparity, to punish crack cocaine offenders 20 times more severely than powder cocaine offenders as it was to punish them 100 times more severely.

The month after Congress adopted the 20:1 ratio the U.S. Supreme Court gave this Sentencing Guidelines (“Guidelines”) amendment more legal force in the case of Derrick Kimbrough. In the Kimbrough case the court held a sentence imposed within the Guidelines could be unreasonable because of disparity between crack and powder cocaine sentencing recommendations.

Section 3582 of Title 18 of the United States Code allows federal inmates who believed they had received unreasonably harsh sentences for crack cocaine offenses to file for a reduction of their sentences following the 2007 amendment. Hundreds, if not thousands, immediately did so. (more…)

June 3, 2009

JUICED BY THE DESIRE FOR FITNESS

Filed under: Drug Defense Attorney — Tags: , , , , , — johntfloyd @ 2:49 am

Addiction to Pumping Iron and Juicing Leads to Massive Arrests in Houston Area and Ft. Bend County

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

It was billed by raiding law enforcement officials as the “largest drug operation” in Fort Bend County history.  The stark, glaring headlines and the “perp walks” would lead one to believe that a violent Mexican drug cartel had just been “busted” in Fort Bend County.

But that wasn’t the case. The “drug operation,” coined Operation “Farmacia de Juicy Phruit,” involved about six dozen personal fitness trainers and body builders who sold human growth hormones, anabolic steroids, Hydrocodone, and Ecstacy in area fitness centers. The mass arrests, which included a Houston firefighter (as if the Houston Fire Department needed more adverse publicity), culminated a two-year investigation led by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and Fort Bend County Sheriff Milton Wright. Fifty-one of those arrested were booked on state charges while the remaining 22 were indicted on federal charges, including money laundering and conspiracy to possess, distribute and manufacture a controlled substance.

“The investigation started here with the sheriff’s office and we ended up following it to other areas where they were bringing in raw products, or were connected otherwise,” DEA special agent Zoran Yankovich told the media. “And it led us into California, Indiana, Louisiana, Georgia, and internationally where raw products were being imported from Mexico, Canada and China.”

Now the primary targets of the investigation face a 46 count federal indictment, a maximum period of incarceration of 20 years and forfeiture of all property and money traceable to their alleged crimes.  A stiff price to pay for the endless pursuit of getting bigger and better. (more…)

January 30, 2009

JUDICIAL WAR OVER CRACK SENTENCING COMES TO AN END

Moore and Spears: District Courts have Discretion to Reject the 100:1 Crack/Powder Cocaine Ratio

By: Houston Criminal Defense Attorney John Floyd and Mr. Billy Sinclair

Last October we posted a blog entitled “The Judicial Wars Invoked by Crack Sentencing” (Oct. 24, 2008). The blog focused on a judicial tiff between the U.S. Supreme Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of James Eric Moore. We are pleased to report that the Supreme Court has finally put this issue to bed in two cases this Term.

This judicial controversy actually began on January 12, 2005 when the Supreme Court issued a controversial ruling that federal district courts were not required to impose precise sentences recommended by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. See: United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). The Court said the Guidelines were advisory in nature, and not mandatory sentencing requirements. Id., at 245-46.

As we reported last October, U.S. District Court Judge Linda Reade, Northern District of Iowa, on November 21, 2005, imposed a term of 188 months of confinement and six years of supervised release on James Eric Moore following a jury conviction for possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. Relying upon the recent Booker decision, Moore asked Judge Reade to impose a sentence below the one recommended by the Guidelines. The judge replied:

“With regard to the crack and power cocaine difference, that is the law. I’m applying the law as it currently stands. If that is going to be changed, that is a congressional matter. Congress is the one who looks at the guidelines and decides whether or not they should be put in—in force … It isn’t the judges. It’s the lawmakers, and I have taken an oath to apply the law, and that’s what I will do in this sentencing.” (more…)

December 24, 2008

HISD CONSIDERS RANDOM DRUG SEARCHES

The War on Drugs at School vs. Teachers’ Expectation of Privacy

By: Houston Criminal Defense Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

Over the last two months sixteen Houston Independent School District employees, including 11 teachers, have been arrested on drug charges—mostly involving marijuana or prescription drugs found in parked vehicles on school campuses. Two of the employees were arrested twice. Most of the arrests came after anonymous tips, prompting HISD police to use drug-sniffing dogs to hit on narcotics in the vehicles.

“This is a matter of great concern to us and we wanted to make sure that our community understood that we will take whatever action is necessary to make sure our schools are safe,” HISD Superintendent Abelardo Saavedra said in response to the sudden rash of arrests.

Besides pressing for the immediate termination of the arrested employees, Saavedra informed the Houston Chronicle that the school district is contemplating a plan to use drug sniffing dogs to search for narcotics in employee parking lots in every HISD school.

Current HISD policy, according to the Chronicle, only permits random drug tests for bus drivers, police officers, and other security personnel. While the executive director of the Congress of Houston Teachers said he was a little concerned that the drug-dog searches might violate civil liberties, Chuck Robinson minimized his concern by adding that “we have to maintain public confidence and trust in our employees.” (more…)

June 12, 2008

BARRY BONDS: HOME RUN KING OR STEROID USER?

Filed under: Drug Defense Attorney — Tags: , — admin @ 11:28 am

Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd Discusses Perjury, Obstruction of Justice and the Barry Bonds Case

Barry Bonds was 21 years of age when he joined the Pittsburgh Pirates in 1986. He was lean, mean, and fast – and certainly not considered a fearsome home run slugger. During his first seven years in the majors, he averaged 25 home runs a year. Then in 1998 St. Louis Cardinals first baseman Mark McGuire eclipsed Roger Maris’ record of 61 home runs in a season by pumping out 70 home runs. The following year Bonds showed up for spring training with the San Francisco Giants with a “bulked up” upper body. In 102 games that year, he still managed to hit 39 home runs. In 2000, Bonds appeared in 143 games and the new “Giant slugger” hammered out 49 home runs. The following year Bonds’ “ballooned up” upper body looked awkward in what appeared to be match-stick legs but it was enough for him to easily breezed by McGuire’s record with 73 home runs. During his last seven full playing seasons (not including 2005 in which he played only 14 games and hit a meager 5 home runs), Bonds averaged 44 home runs.

Most home run kings hit more home runs during the early years of their careers than in the final years. For example, major league home run king Hank Aaron averaged 31 home runs a season during his first seven years in the majors while averaging 28 a season during his final seven years; and Willie Mays averaged 35 home runs during his first seven years while averaging only 18 during his final seven years.

With home run power displays becoming a fixture in major league baseball,  beginning in 1998 with the Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa’s chase to break the Babe Ruth/Roger Maris 60-61 home run records and culminating with Bonds’ 73 home run performance in 2001, rumors began to swirl inside and outside of Major League Baseball that rampant performance enhancing drug use was corrupting the cherished sport.

In 2003 the federal government was investigating what became known as the “Balco steroids ring” – the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative in San Francisco which was owned and operated by Victor Conte. In September of that year federal agents conducted a raid on Conte’s lab and seized documents that, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, included the “doping calendars,”  “drug regime,” and “payment records” for performance enhancement drugs used by Barry Bonds. The documents also included “positive” tests results for steroid use against Bonds in 2000, the year before he hit his record-breaking 73 home runs. (more…)

Powered by WordPress © 2010 John T. Floyd III Crimnal Defense Attorney : Webmaster Kevin Grey Lee