⚖️ Video Explainer – Florida Mandatory Minimums: What You Need to Know

When a judge hands down a harsh prison sentence in a Florida court, the public frequently assumes it was their deliberate choice. However, in many high-stakes trafficking and serious drug cases throughout the Tampa Bay region, that simply isn’t true. Florida’s rigid mandatory minimum sentencing laws actively strip away judicial discretion, forcing judges to impose fixed, predetermined prison terms even when they believe a lesser penalty would be fairer.

Because the specific facts, charges, and evidence involved radically dictate your legal outcome, early defensive intervention is paramount. In this video, former prosecutor and Board Certified Criminal Trial Specialist W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. breaks down these strict statutory limits. Watch to understand your options, and call 813-222-2220 or visit Drug2GO.com for expert guidance.

• Direct Video Link: https://youtu.be/EsraejOUh3U

Florida Statute § 893.135 Amphetamine or Methamphetamine Minimum Mandatory Sentences

Florida laws on Amphetamine or Methamphetamine provide harsh minimum mandatory sentences that kick-in at 14 grams. The stakes become higher when 28 grams are alleged and proven by admissible evidence to a jury and/or sentencing judge in Florida State Courts. A 15 year minimum prison sentence is possible at 200 grams.

The United States Code also provides harsh sentences for trafficking in this controlled substance. At 50 grams a life sentence is possible for certain defendants. See 21 USC §§ 841(a), 841(b)(1)(A); § 2D1.1 for more information.

Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

Video Description:

In Florida, a judge’s hands are often tied by mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Former prosecutor and Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. explains how specific trafficking and serious drug charges carry non-negotiable prison times. If you or a loved one are facing serious state charges in the Tampa Bay area, your local defense strategy must begin immediately.

Florida Statute § 893.135 Marijuana Minimum Mandatory Sentences

The Florida Statutes on Cannabis and Marijuana provide harsh minimum mandatory sentences that kick-in at 25 pounds and 2000 plants. The stakes become higher when 10,000 pounds or 10,000 plants are alleged and proven by admissible evidence to a jury and/or sentencing judge in Florida State Courts.

Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

In this video we explain that when a judge hands down a harsh sentence under Florida Statute § 893.135 in a Florida drug court, the public frequently assumes it was their deliberate choice. In many high-stakes trafficking and serious drug cases throughout the Tampa Bay region, that simply isn’t true. Florida’s strict mandatory minimum sentencing laws actively strip away judicial discretion, forcing judges to impose rigid, predetermined prison terms even when they believe a lesser penalty would be fairer.

The specific facts, charges, and evidence involved can dramatically alter your entire legal outcome. As a former prosecutor and Board Certified Criminal Trial Specialist, W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. understands how to navigate these strict statutory boundaries. Learning your legal options early can make a critical difference in your trial defense. Contact our office today at 813-222-2220 or visit Drug2GO.com.

Are there minimum mandatory sentences for Molly under Florida Statute § 893.135? Yes.

Phenethylamines aka Molly aka MDMA Have Minimum Mandatory Sentences

Yes, Florida laws on Phenethylamines aka Molly aka MDMA provide harsh minimum mandatory sentences that kick-in at 10 grams. The stakes become higher when 200 grams are alleged and proven by admissible evidence to a jury and/or sentencing judge in Florida State Courts.

A 15 year minimum prison sentence is possible at 400 grams.

Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

Video: Understanding Florida Sale of Cocaine Charges

Summary of YouTube Video

Watching an attorney explain how Florida drug prosecutions work can help you better understand the criminal process. Every criminal case is unique, and the facts, evidence, and applicable law determine the best defense strategy. This video provides general educational information and should not be considered legal advice for any specific case.

Tampa Sale of Cocaine Lawyer – DRUG1400 Defense Attorney

Charged with Sale of Cocaine in Tampa? Speak with a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer Today.

Being arrested for DRUG1400 Sale of Cocaine is a serious matter that can place your freedom, career, and future at risk. Drug sale allegations often arise from undercover operations, confidential informants, controlled buys, surveillance, or traffic stops, and the prosecution must still prove every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Attorney W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. is a former prosecutor and a Florida Bar Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who has spent decades defending individuals charged with serious felony drug crimes throughout Tampa and Hillsborough County. Call (813) 222-2220 today for a confidential consultation.

Why Should I Hire W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr.?

Choosing the right attorney can make an important difference when you are facing felony drug charges. Casey Ebsary is a former Florida prosecutor who understands how law enforcement investigates narcotics cases and how prosecutors prepare cases for trial. As a Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer, he has extensive courtroom experience handling complex felony cases and works to identify weaknesses in the State’s evidence while protecting his clients’ constitutional rights.

Learn more about attorney Casey Ebsary:

https://drug2go.com/about

What Is the Florida Crime of Sale of Cocaine?

Florida law prohibits the unauthorized sale, manufacture, delivery, or possession with intent to sell certain controlled substances, including cocaine. Sale of cocaine is commonly prosecuted as a felony offense under Chapter 893 of the Florida Statutes. Whether the State can obtain a conviction depends upon the specific facts, admissible evidence, and whether prosecutors can prove every required legal element beyond a reasonable doubt.

Official Florida Legislature:

https://www.leg.state.fl.us

Florida Statute §893.13 (Justia):

https://law.justia.com/codes/florida/title-xlvi/chapter-893/section-893-13

DRUG1400 Quick Reference

What Must Prosecutors Prove?

The prosecution bears the burden of proving every required element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Depending upon the allegations, the State may be required to prove that the defendant knowingly sold, delivered, manufactured, or possessed with intent to sell a controlled substance identified by Florida law. Evidence presented during the case must satisfy the applicable jury instructions and the rules governing criminal trials.

Florida Standard Criminal Jury Instructions are published by the Florida Supreme Court.

https://www.floridasupremecourt.org

Does the State Need Physical Evidence?

Physical evidence is frequently important in drug prosecutions, but every criminal case depends upon its own facts. Prosecutors may rely upon laboratory testing, witness testimony, surveillance, recorded communications, or other evidence permitted under the rules of evidence. A defense attorney carefully reviews whether the evidence was lawfully obtained, accurately preserved, and legally admissible before trial.

What Happens During a Drug Sale Investigation?

Drug sale investigations often involve undercover officers, confidential informants, surveillance operations, controlled purchases, or search warrants. Law enforcement agencies may also rely on digital evidence, text messages, recorded telephone calls, or financial records depending on the allegations. The investigative methods used in a case can become an important issue when evaluating possible legal defenses and constitutional challenges.

Can Intent Be Challenged?

Yes. In some prosecutions, the State alleges possession with intent to sell rather than an actual completed sale. Whether prosecutors can establish intent depends upon the admissible evidence, and the circumstances of each case may be closely examined by both the prosecution and the defense. Intent cannot simply be assumed and must be supported by legally sufficient evidence.

Are Search and Seizure Issues Important?

Search and seizure questions frequently arise in felony drug prosecutions. Traffic stops, vehicle searches, residential search warrants, consent searches, and warrantless searches may all become important issues depending upon the facts of the investigation. When constitutional protections are violated, a defense attorney may evaluate whether legal remedies are available under applicable law.

Why Is Local Experience Important?

Drug prosecutions are handled in the local courts where charges are filed, making experience in Hillsborough County valuable. Attorney Casey Ebsary has represented clients throughout the Tampa Bay area for many years and understands the procedures commonly encountered in serious felony cases. Local knowledge, trial experience, and careful preparation can all play an important role when defending criminal charges.

What Happens After an Arrest?

After an arrest, a defendant typically proceeds through several stages of the criminal justice system before the case is resolved. These stages may include first appearance, arraignment, discovery, motion practice, plea negotiations, and, if necessary, trial. Each stage presents important legal decisions that should be made after consulting with an experienced criminal defense attorney.

Florida Drug Case Timeline

Frequently Asked Questions

Is sale of cocaine the same as trafficking?

No. Florida law treats sale offenses and trafficking offenses as separate crimes with different statutory provisions. The exact charge depends upon the allegations made by prosecutors and the facts of the investigation.

Can someone be charged without money changing hands?

The answer depends on the specific allegations and evidence in the case. Florida law contains separate offenses involving sale, delivery, manufacture, and possession with intent to sell. An attorney can explain the particular charge after reviewing the arrest documents and available evidence.

Can undercover officers testify at trial?

Yes. Undercover officers may testify if they are called as witnesses and their testimony is admitted under the applicable rules of evidence. As with any witness, credibility and cross-examination may become important issues during trial.

Should I talk to detectives after my arrest?

Whether speaking with law enforcement is advisable depends upon the circumstances of the investigation. Before answering questions about a pending criminal case, many people choose to consult with an attorney to understand their legal rights and options.

Where can I read the current Florida statute?

The current version of the statute is available through the Florida Legislature and Justia.

Florida Legislature:

https://www.leg.state.fl.us

Justia:

https://law.justia.com/codes/florida/title-xlvi/chapter-893/section-893-13

Speak With a Tampa Sale of Cocaine Defense Lawyer Today

If you have been charged with DRUG1400 Sale of Cocaine in Tampa or anywhere in Hillsborough County, obtaining experienced legal representation as early as possible is an important step. Attorney W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. is a former prosecutor and a Florida Bar Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer who has devoted his career to defending individuals accused of serious criminal offenses. Every case deserves a thorough review of the facts, the evidence, and the applicable law before important decisions are made.

Learn more about Casey Ebsary:

https://drug2go.com/about

Contact the Law Office of W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr.:

https://drug2go.com/contact

Call (813) 222-2220 today for a confidential consultation.

Meta Description

Charged with Sale of Cocaine (DRUG1400) in Tampa? Former prosecutor and Board Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer W.F. Casey Ebsary Jr. defends serious Florida drug charges. Call (813) 222-2220.

Original Drug1400 Sale of Cocaine Post from 2010

Cocaine Sale

If you have been charged with DRUG1400 SALE OF COCAINE you can call a Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney at 1-877-793-9290 and tell me your story.

Form Code: DRUG1400


Florida Statute: 893.13.1A
Level: Fel (Felony)
Degree: 2nd
Description: SALE OF COCAINE

DRUG1400 SALE OF COCAINE is often charged in Hillsborough County, Florida.

Title XLVI CRIMES
Chapter 893 DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL


893.13 Prohibited acts; penalties.

(1)(a) Except as authorized by this chapter and chapter 499, it is unlawful for any person to sell, manufacture, or deliver, or possess with intent to sell, manufacture, or deliver, a controlled substance. Any person who violates this provision with respect to:

1. A controlled substance named or described in s. 893.03(1)(a), (1)(b), (1)(d), (2)(a), (2)(b), or (2)(c)4., commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

2. A controlled substance named or described in s. 893.03(1)(c), (2)(c)1., (2)(c)2., (2)(c)3., (2)(c)5., (2)(c)6., (2)(c)7., (2)(c)8., (2)(c)9., (3), or (4) commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

3. A controlled substance named or described in s. 893.03(5) commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

Share this:

• Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
• Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

Like this:

Like Loading…

Related

Federal Drug Defense Strategy: Navigating Cocaine Mandatory Minimums in Tampa

How Do You Contact a Federal Criminal Defense Attorney in Tampa for a Cocaine Case?

If you or a loved one is facing federal crack or powder cocaine charges in the Middle District of Florida, securing an aggressive defense is your most critical priority. You can immediately speak to federal criminal defense attorney W.F. Casey Ebsary by calling our local Tampa office directly at 813-222-2220. We encourage you to review our professional background on our Attorney Bio Page to understand our decades of trial experience. To schedule a completely confidential evaluation of your pending indictment, please visit our secure Contact Page right away.

Federal Statutory Weight and Penalty Matrix

What is the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010?

The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 is a federal statute enacted by the United States Congress to correct severe inequities in drug crime penalties. Before this legislation took effect, federal drug laws imposed a highly criticized 100-to-1 weight ratio between powder cocaine and crack cocaine offenses. The new statutory framework dramatically reduced this disparity down to an 18-to-1 ratio and entirely eliminated the mandatory minimum penalty for simple possession. You can review the official statutory text and ongoing legislative annotations directly on Justia US Code.

How Does the Supreme Court Ruling in Dorsey v. United States Protect Defendants?

The United States Supreme Court issued a major ruling in Dorsey v. United States that resolved how changes to federal statutory penalties apply to pending cases. The high court explicitly held that the more lenient mandatory minimum provisions of the Fair Sentencing Act apply to offenders who committed a crime before the law was signed but were sentenced after it took effect. This binding precedent ensures that individuals are protected by the revised, lower mandatory minimum laws rather than obsolete, harsher rules. The full judicial opinion and archival dockets can be researched directly through the official United States Supreme Court Website.

What Did the Supreme Court Conclude About the Interim Guidelines Window?

The Supreme Court in Dorsey also addressed the specific legal status of defendants caught in the interim operational window of the new law. The Court held that the new Act’s lower statutory minimums apply to individuals who committed an offense prior to the effective date and were sentenced before the updated Federal Sentencing Guidelines officially took effect. This critical decision covered the transitional gap between August 3, 2010, and November 1, 2010, preventing an unfair disparity in penalties. By doing so, the ruling created a uniform standard that guaranteed all post-enactment sentencing proceedings benefited from the legislative reforms.

What Are the Specific Weight Thresholds for Federal Crack Cocaine Mandatory Minimums Today?

Under modified federal drug trafficking laws, a five-year mandatory minimum prison sentence is triggered when an offense involves 28 grams or more of a substance containing crack cocaine. To trigger the severe ten-year mandatory minimum prison sentence, the prosecution must establish that the offense involved at least 280 grams of crack cocaine. These modern thresholds represent an enormous structural shift away from the old limits, which stood at a mere 5 grams and 50 grams. Our defense practice meticulously reviews all police seizure weights to ensure that the government has not artificially inflated the narcotics quantities.

What is Section 404 of the First Step Act of 2018?

Section 404 of the First Step Act represents a massive legislative expansion of federal drug sentencing reform by granting retroactive relief. White the Dorsey decision only shielded individuals sentenced after 2010, the First Step Act allowed individuals sentenced under the old 100-to-1 regime to petition for immediate reductions. Eligible federal inmates can request that judges apply the modern, lower statutory minimums to their historical convictions. Detailed information regarding these retroactive relief statistics is routinely published by the United States Sentencing Commission.

How Do Federal Judges Determine a Final Sentence in a Cocaine Case?

Federal judges calculate criminal sentences by conducting a multi-step analysis during a formal sentencing hearing. The court first computes an advisory range based on the official guidelines grid, balancing the drug weight against the defendant’s prior criminal history score. The judge must then ensure the final sentence complies with any overriding statutory mandatory minimums established by Congress. Finally, the court evaluates personal mitigation factors to decide if a downward variance below the recommended guidelines is legally appropriate.

What is the Role of the United States Sentencing Commission?

The United States Sentencing Commission is an independent agency housed entirely within the federal judicial branch. This agency is tasked with establishing comprehensive sentencing policies and issuing the official Federal Sentencing Guidelines manual. When Congress passes new statutory laws like the Fair Sentencing Act, the Commission updates the guideline point values to reflect those updates. You can access extensive educational reports, amendment archives, and legal research tools on the official United States Sentencing Commission Website.

What is the Primary Difference Between a Statutory Minimum and a Sentencing Guideline?

A statutory mandatory minimum is a fixed, mandatory prison term established directly by Congress that a federal judge cannot normally go below. In contrast, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines provide a recommended sentencing range calculated based on the offense characteristics and the defendant’s prior record. While judges retain broad discretion to deviate above or below the recommended guideline ranges, they are strictly bound by the statutory minimums unless an explicit exception applies. Effective defense work focuses on neutralizing statutory minimum thresholds while simultaneously driving down the guideline point calculations.

What is the Safety Valve Exception in Federal Drug Defense?

The federal safety valve exception is a highly valuable statutory tool that allows a judge to bypass a harsh mandatory minimum prison sentence. To qualify for safety valve relief under federal law, a defendant must satisfy five specific criteria, including having minimal criminal history points and zero weapons involvement. The statute also requires the defendant to participate in a truthful disclosure session with federal prosecutors prior to the final sentencing date. Our firm carefully prepares clients for this delicate process to maximize their chances of avoiding mandatory prison terms.

How Can Prior Convictions Escalate Federal Cocaine Mandatory Minimums?

A defendant’s prior criminal record can trigger severe statutory sentencing enhancements under federal narcotics laws. If a defendant has a past conviction for a serious drug felony or a serious violent felony, the statutory mandatory minimum can double. To execute these severe enhancements, the United States Attorney’s Office must file a formal written notice under 21 U.S.C. Section 851. We rigorously audit every past state and federal conviction to challenge whether those entries meet the strict statutory definitions required for an enhancement.

Where Do Federal Cocaine Cases Take Place in the Tampa Bay Area?

Federal criminal cases originating in Hillsborough, Pinellas, or surrounding counties are prosecuted inside the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Court proceedings, including trials and sentencing hearings, are held at the Sam M. Gibbons United States Courthouse in downtown Tampa. You can access local court schedules, administrative orders, and filing protocols by visiting the Middle District of Florida Courthouse Website. Having an established local attorney who regularly practices before the Tampa division judges provides a critical defensive advantage.

What is a Federal Drug Conspiracy Charge Under 21 U.S.C. Section 846?

A federal drug conspiracy charge does not require proof that an individual was caught with physical narcotics in their possession. Instead, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an agreement existed between multiple individuals to violate federal drug laws. Under federal conspiracy doctrines, a defendant can be held legally accountable for the entire drug weight distributed by the broader organization. Defending against these broad, sweeping conspiracy indictments demands an aggressive and deeply analytical legal strategy.

How Do Defense Attorneys Challenge the Government’s Drug Weight Calculations?

Challenging the exact weight of the seized controlled substances is a primary battlefield in federal narcotics defense. Federal law includes the weight of any carrier mediums, adulterants, or diluents when calculating the total statutory threshold. Our legal team cross-examines forensic chemists, audits laboratory testing equipment, and reviews chain-of-custody logs for structural errors. Forcing the government to substantiate every single gram can successfully lower a client’s mandatory minimum exposure.

Why is the General Federal Saving Statute Important in Criminal Cases?

The general federal saving statute dictates that the amendment or repeal of a criminal law does not automatically extinguish past legal liabilities. Historically, this meant that individuals who broke an old law were forced to face those severe terms even if Congress later softened the penalties. The Dorsey decision successfully carved out an exception by proving that Congress intended the Fair Sentencing Act to override this default rule for newer sentencings. Understanding how this saving rule interacts with modern criminal justice reform is vital when structuring any retroactive litigation strategy.

Can an Older Federal Crack Cocaine Sentence Be Reduced Retroactively?

Yes, individuals currently serving sentences imposed under the obsolete 100-to-1 crack cocaine laws can still seek retroactive adjustments. These retroactive applications are filed directly with the original sentencing court utilizing the modern frameworks set by the First Step Act. The presiding federal district judge retains the discretion to reduce the term of imprisonment after evaluating current guidelines and inmate safety. Our Tampa law office conducts detailed eligibility audits to assist families in pursuing these vital sentence modifications.

What Role Do Federal Presentence Investigation Reports Play in Sentencing?

A Presentence Investigation Report is a comprehensive document prepared by a federal probation officer prior to your sentencing date. This critical report details your personal history, financial status, complete criminal record, and the officer’s personal calculation of the sentencing guidelines. Because federal judges rely heavily on this document, any uncorrected factual or legal error can cause a significantly longer prison sentence. Our defense team carefully reviews every page of this report to submit formal, written legal objections before it reaches the judge.

How Can You Secure an Immediate Strategic Case Evaluation with drug2go.com?

When navigating the federal judicial system, delay is the enemy of a successful outcome. Our local Tampa legal team stands ready to step into the gap and protect your future from severe mandatory sentences. Call our central office directly at 813-222-2220 to establish immediate contact with an experienced practitioner. You may also outline your situation securely through our digital platform by visiting the drug2go.com Contact Portal right now.

Original Discussion from 2014

Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Lawyer for cocaine cases notes new United States Supreme Court case law on Mandatory minimum sentencing for Drug offenses under the Fair Sentencing Act’s more lenient mandatory minimum provisions.

The Court ruled today that the favorable provisions apply to offenders who committed crack cocaine crime before effective date of Act, but were sentenced after Act took effect .

The Court also held the new Act’s lower minimums also apply to those who committed an offense prior to effective date of Act and were sentenced after the new Act’s effective date, before new Guidelines took effect.

Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

An alleged Florida Drug Trafficker Walked on Cocaine charges. Charges were based upon a Cell Phone Search. The Number You Have Tracked is No Longer in Service – He was charged with ” possession of more than 400 grams of cocaine, as well as fleeing and eluding, driving while his license was revoked as a habitual offender, and resisting arrest without violence.”

The court questioned whether the warrantless use of electronically generated cell site location information to track an individual’s movements in real time both on public roads and, in this case, also into a residence, violates a subjective expectation of privacy in that person’s location . . . .”

The distinguishing factor in this case was the police tracked the suspect in his home.”Officers learned of his location on the public roads, and ultimately inside a residence, only by virtue of tracking his real time cell site location information emanating from his cell phone.”

Florida Supreme Court rules that “[t]he trial court found that the application for the October 23, 2007, order did not contain a sufficient factual basis on which to issue a search warrant, but denied the motion to suppress, finding that no warrant was required to use Tracey’s real time cell site location data to track him on public streets where the court held he had no expectation of privacy.” The Court found that the court below had erroneously “concluded that the exclusionary rule does not apply to prevent the State from using evidence derived from the statutory violation. . . . This conclusion was the result of reliance in part on federal decisions that have held that the exclusionary rule is not applicable to violation of the federal Stored Communications Act because the Act expressly rules out exclusion as a remedy, by stating that the listed civil and criminal penalties are the only judicial remedies and sanctions for violation of that act.”

Under Florida law, “[w] cannot overlook the inexorable and significant fact that, because cell phones are indispensable to so many people and are normally carried on one’s person, cell phone tracking can easily invade the right to privacy in one’s home or other private areas, a matter that the government cannot always anticipate and one which, when it occurs, is clearly a Fourth Amendment violation.”

Florida Supreme Court’s Ruling

“We further hold that under the circumstances of this case in which there was no warrant, court order, or binding appellate precedent authorizing real time cell site location tracking upon which the officers could have reasonably relied, the “good faith” exception to the exclusionary rule for “objectively reasonable law enforcement activity” set forth by the Supreme Court in Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419, 2429 (2011), is not applicable. Thus, Tracey’s motion to suppress the evidence should have been granted.”

Cell Site Location Information Background – CSLI

“Cell site location information (also referred to as CSLI) refers to location information generated when a cell phone call occurs. Cell service providers maintain a network of radio base stations called “cell sites” in different coverage areas. A cell site will detect a radio signal from a cell phone and connect it to the local network, the internet, or another wireless network. The cell phones identify themselves by an automatic process called “registration,” which occurs continuously while the cell phone is turned on regardless of whether a call is being placed. When a call is placed and the cell phone moves closer to a different cell tower, the cell phone service provider’s switching system switches the call to the nearest cell tower. The location of the cell phone can be pinpointed with varying degrees of accuracy depending on the size of the geographic area served by each cell tower, and is determined by reference to data generated by cell sites pertaining to a specific cell phone. “

“Florida’s counterpart to this federal scheme is contained in chapter 934, Florida Statutes, titled “Security of Communications.” In 2007 when the order in this case was entered for installation of the pen register and trap and trace device as to Tracey’s cell phone, section 934.31, Florida Statutes (2007), similar to federal law, required a court order to “install or use a pen register or a trap and trace device.” § 934.31(1), Fla. Stat. (2007). Section 934.33(1), Florida Statutes (2007), allowed entry of the order if the officer making the application under section 934.32, Florida Statutes (2007), certified that the information likely to be obtained by the installation and use of a pen register or trap and trace device is “relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation” by that agency. § 934.32(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2007) (emphasis added). “

Complete Opinion is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw1ZJqIwtQE4VlEwWjdJVkRwVk0/view?usp=sharing
Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

What happens in a typical Constructive of Possession of Cocaine Case in Florida?

Here are excerpts from what a constructive possession appeals court court just did in Tampa Bay, Florida:

In March 2014, Manatee County Sheriff’s deputies were called to a motel in Bradenton to investigate a possible robbery. When they arrived, they encountered the victim who informed them she had been robbed by Edwards and his friend, Rachel Simms. The officers located Edwards and Simms in a motel room and interviewed them. During the investigation, the officers discovered a car key for a vehicle parked outside. One of the officers had seen Edwards sitting in the driver’s seat of the vehicle a couple of hours prior to the robbery call. As a result, the officers asked Edwards for consent to search the vehicle. Edwards notified the officers that he did not own the vehicle but instead had borrowed it. The officers then obtained consent from the owner of the vehicle, but the owner advised the officers that the key found in the motel room would only work in the vehicle’s ignition. It would not open the vehicle because the vehicle was equipped with a combination lock. The owner gave the officers the combination to unlock the vehicle, but the evidence reflected that Edwards knew the combination as well.

During the search of the vehicle, one of the officers located a gray canvas bag under the driver’s seat. Inside that bag was a wallet that contained Edwards’s identification card as well as a bail bond receipt bearing the name of “Joanne A. Simms.” The robbery victim’s identification card was also found in the canvas bag along with a few other items that contained no identifying information. The police report reflected that there was a smaller purple bag inside the canvas bag and inside that smaller bag was a plastic baggie containing rock cocaine. The officer who found the cocaine testified that there was indeed a purple bag inside the canvas bag despite the fact that there was no purple bag submitted into evidence at the sheriff’s office.

“While this case does present circumstances that could be interpreted as incriminating, those circumstances can also be construed as being consistent with . . . innocence.”

Edwards was arrested and charged with robbery with a firearm and possession of cocaine. At trial, Simms testified regarding the events leading up to and including the alleged robbery. However, her testimony revealed some inconsistencies regarding exactly when she had been inside the vehicle in question. She at first admitted going with Edwards and the victim to get cigarettes, but she subsequently denied being in the vehicle on the day of the alleged robbery. However, Edwards testified that on the relevant date, he, Simms, and the victim all got into the vehicle and went to a local convenience store to obtain cigarettes. He testified that Simms drove the vehicle there. He denied possessing the cocaine, and there was no evidence presented regarding ownership of the canvas bag or the purple bag within the canvas bag. There was also no fingerprint evidence submitted.

Edwards moved for judgment of acquittal arguing that the vehicle had been jointly occupied and that the State had failed to present independent proof that Edwards had knowledge of the cocaine and the ability to maintain dominion or control over it. He proffered that it was possible that Simms or the victim placed the cocaine in the bag. His motion was denied.

Ultimately, the jury acquitted Edwards of the armed robbery charge but found him guilty of the possession charge. He was sentenced to a suspended five-year prison sentence and placed on one year of community control followed by two years of probation. His license was also suspended, and a community service requirement was imposed.

Why did the Florida Court Reverse the Drug Crime Conviction?

We employ de novo review over the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal. See Pagan v. State, 830 So. 2d 792, 803 (Fla.2002). We will only reverse if the conviction is not supported by competent, substantial evidence. See id. Yet “[w]here, as here, the evidence of the defendant’s guilt is entirely circumstantial, a conviction cannot be sustained unless the evidence is inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” Bennett v. State, 46 So. 3d 1181, 1183 (Fla.2d DCA 2010) (citing State v. Law, 559 So. 2d 187, 188 (Fla.1989)).

What does the Prosecutor Need to Prove to establish Possession of Cocaine in a Drug Crimes Case?

Here, Edwards was not found in physical possession of the cocaine and thus the State’s case was predicated on constructive possession. The State was required to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Edwards knew of the presence of the cocaine and had the ability to exercise dominion and control over it. Bennett, 46 So. 3d at 1184; Jacksonv. State, 995 So. 2d 535, 539 (Fla.2d DCA 2008). “The surrounding circumstances must support the inference of a ‘conscious and substantial possession by the accused, as distinguished from a mere involuntary or superficial possession.’ ” Jackson, 995 So. 2d at 539 (quoting Reynolds v. State, 111 So. 285, 286 (Fla.1926)). “Mere proximity to contraband, without more, is legally insufficient to prove possession.” Id.(quoting Pena v. State, 465 So. 2d 1386, 1388 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)).

“As our case law has made clear, a defendant’s knowledge and control of contraband may be inferred where there are incriminating circumstances beyond mere proximity from which a jury could infer those elements.”

The evidence failed to show that Edwards had knowledge of the presence of or had the ability to exercise dominion and control over the cocaine. Although he admitted borrowing the car, knew the combination to unlock it, and had been seen sitting in the driver’s seat a couple of hours prior to the alleged robbery, he was not with the vehicle when the officers arrived. Further, there was evidence presented that Simms and the victim had been in the vehicle with Edwards that day and that Simms had actually driven the vehicle.

What happens in Drug Possession cases when the vehicle has multiple occupants?

Where the area in which drugs are found is in joint, rather than exclusive possession, a defendant’s “knowledge of the contraband’s presence and the ability to control it will not be inferred from the ownership but must be established by independent proof.” Jackson, 995 So. 2d at 539 (quoting Brown v. State, 428 So. 2d 250, 252 (Fla. 1983)). This can be done either “through ‘evidence that the defendant had actual knowledge of the presence of the contraband or evidence of incriminating statements or circumstances, other than simple proximity to the contraband, from which the jury could infer the defendant’s knowledge’ of the contraband.” Id.(quoting Wagner v. State, 950 So. 2d 511, 513 (Fla.2d DCA 2007)). “An inference of knowledge and dominion and control may . . . arise where the contraband located in [a] jointly occupied [area] is found in or about other personal property which is shown to be owned or controlled by the defendant.” Id.

What happens in a Possession of Cocaine Case where the area that drugs were found was Jointly Occupied?

However, in this case, the cocaine was found in an area that the evidence reflected had been jointly occupied, and the cocaine was found near personal property which was shown to be owned or controlled by at least three people including Edwards. The victim’s identification card was located inside the gray canvas bag, and a bail bond receipt bearing the name of “Joanne A. Simms” was found inside Edwards’s wallet. Consequently, under these limited circumstances, we refuse to apply an inference of Edwards’s knowledge of the presence of and dominion and control over the cocaine. Cf. Jackson, 995 So. 2d at 540-41 (holding that surrounding circumstances were sufficient for a rational jury to conclude that the drugs contained in a change purse located near the defendant were known to him and were under his dominion and control where the change purse appeared to have spilled from a larger purse, the defendant was known to carry a purse and there were no other purses in the dwelling, the defendant’s identification was found inside a cigarette case that also appeared to have spilled from the purse, and there was no evidence in or around the purse or the change purse that they belonged to anyone other than defendant).

What does a Florida Court do where there is a defense based upon a jointly occupied vehicle?

This court has previously reversed a conviction based on constructive possession where a defendant was in a jointly occupied vehicle and drugs were located near his personal belongings but the items were in an area to which the other passengers had equal access.1 See, e.g., S.B. v. State, 657 So. 2d 1252, 1253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (holding that evidence was not inconsistent with the defendant’s theory that someone put marijuana in his bag where the bag was located inside the trunk and the marijuana was found inside another container that was inside the defendant’s bag, where multiple people had access to the bag, and where the defendant disclaimed ownership of the container). This is such a case.

What do Florida Courts do when there is a Jointly Occupied House?

Similar dispositions have occurred where drugs were found concealed near a defendant’s personal property inside jointly occupied houses. See, e.g., Bennett, 46 So. 3d at 1183 (holding in relevant part that the State failed to prove constructive possession of drugs found inside a cardboard box where defendant’s shirt was found because there was no evidence to prove who owned the other clothes in the box and defendant had a reasonable hypothesis that he threw his shirt on top of the box without knowing that the drugs were inside); N.K.W., Jr. v. State, 788 So. 2d 1036, 1038 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (holding evidence was insufficient to establish constructive possession where, although drugs were found in a plastic bag inside defendant’s wallet, defendant was never asked if the bag belonged to him, no fingerprints were lifted from the bag, defendant denied ownership of the bag, and multiple people had access to the room where his wallet was located); Evans v. State, 32 So. 3d 188, 189-90 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (holding that the State failed to prove constructive possession where drugs were hidden in a pain reliever bottle inside a small toiletry bag, which was itself inside a duffel bag that also contained the defendant’s passport, but where no one was in actual possession of the duffel bag at the time of the search, multiple people had access to the room where the bag was found, no fingerprints were found on the duffel bag or pain reliever bottle, and no one was asked about ownership of the pill bottle).

The proximity of Edwards’s identification to the purple bag in which the cocaine was concealed might be consistent with his having knowledge of the cocaine and dominion and control over it. Yet those facts are equally susceptible to the reasonable hypothesis that the cocaine was in the possession and control of Simms or the victim while they were in the vehicle and that Edwards simply threw his wallet into the gray canvas bag without knowing that the cocaine was inside. See Bennett, 46 So. 3d at 1184. Indeed, there was no evidence presented as to when the cocaine was placed in the purple bag or when the purple bag was placed inside the gray canvas bag. See Evans v. State, 32 So. 3d 188, 191 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (noting that presence of the defendant’s passport in duffel bag suggests he placed it there, but explaining that “[s]uch an inference . . . provides no time frame with regard to when the contraband came to reside in the bag, nor any help as to appellant’s present dominion over the contraband” and, therefore, the “mere presence of the passport” was insufficient to establish defendant’s constructive possession). The lack of a time frame for placement of the cocaine in either bag, combined with the lack of evidence regarding ownership of either bag, the lack of fingerprint evidence, and the fact that items belonging to persons other than Edwards were also located in the gray canvas bag lead us to conclude that the State’s circumstantial evidence failed to prove that Edwards was in constructive possession of the cocaine.possession of the cocaine.possession of the cocaine. While this case does present circumstances that could be interpreted as incriminating, those circumstances can also be construed as being consistent with Edwards’s hypothesis of innocence.

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

What does a Florida Court do where there is a defense based upon a jointly occupied house?

We emphasize that it was the combination of these factors that requires us to reverse the judgment in this case. We do not intend for this opinion to be interpreted as requiring reversal whenever drugs are located near a defendant’s personal items that are commingled with personal items belonging to someone else. As our case law has made clear, a defendant’s knowledge and control of contraband may be inferred where there are incriminating circumstances beyond mere proximity from which a jury could infer those elements. See Jackson, 995 So. 2d at 539.

Source:

http://www.2dca.org/opinions/Opinion_Pages/Opinion_Pages_2016/February/February%2012,%202016/2D15-612.pdf
Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

A cocaine possession charge in Florida is a serious matter with potentially life-altering consequences. If you or a loved one has been arrested for DRUG1100 Possession of Cocaine in Tampa or Hillsborough County, it’s crucial to understand the charges and your legal rights. This article provides essential information about this charge and why contacting an experienced Tampa criminal defense attorney is your best course of action.

Understanding DRUG1100: Possession of Cocaine in Florida

In Florida, possession of cocaine is a felony offense. The specific charge, DRUG1100, falls under Florida Statute 893.13.1F. Here’s a breakdown:

• Form Code: DRUG1100
• Florida Statute: 893.13.1F (Linking to an external, authoritative source like the Florida Statutes is good for SEO and credibility)
• Level: Felony
• Degree: 3rd Degree (Generally, but see enhancements below)
• Description: Possession of Cocaine

Important Note: While simple possession of cocaine is typically a third-degree felony, Florida law includes enhancements that can increase the severity of the charges. One critical enhancement is detailed in 893.13(1)(f): possessing, selling, manufacturing, or delivering a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a public housing facility. Cocaine falls under the controlled substances listed in 893.03(1)(a), (1)(b), (1)(d), (2)(a), (2)(b), or (2)(c)4., which means that possession within 1,000 feet of public housing automatically elevates the charge to a first-degree felony.

Penalties for Cocaine Possession in Florida:

The penalties for cocaine possession depend on the degree of the felony:

• Third-Degree Felony (DRUG1100 – Standard Possession):
  • Up to 5 years in prison.
  • Up to 5 years of probation.
  • Fines up to $5,000.
  • A permanent criminal record.
  • Driver’s license suspension.
• First-Degree Felony (Enhanced Charge – within 1,000 feet of Public Housing):
  • Up to 30 years in prison.
  • Up to 30 years of probation.
  • Fines up to $10,000.

Beyond the Direct Penalties:

A felony conviction, even for a third-degree felony, can have devastating long-term consequences:

• Difficulty finding employment: Many employers conduct background checks.
• Housing restrictions: Landlords may deny applications based on a criminal record.
• Loss of professional licenses: Certain professions may revoke licenses due to a felony conviction.
• Immigration consequences: For non-citizens, a drug conviction can lead to deportation or denial of citizenship.
• Loss of civil rights: This can include the right to vote or own a firearm.

Why You Need a Tampa Drug Crimes Defense Attorney:

DRUG1100 Possession of Cocaine is often charged in Hillsborough County. See our list of 250 ways to be charged with drug crimes in Tampa Bay. A skilled criminal defense attorney can make a significant difference in the outcome of your case. Here’s how an attorney can help:

• Investigate the Arrest: An attorney will thoroughly examine the circumstances of your arrest, including the legality of any search and seizure.
• Challenge Evidence: If the evidence was obtained illegally, your attorney can file a motion to suppress it, potentially leading to the charges being dismissed.
• Negotiate with the Prosecutor: An experienced attorney can negotiate with the prosecutor to potentially reduce the charges, secure a plea bargain, or explore options like drug court or diversion programs.
• Build a Strong Defense: Possible defenses include lack of knowledge (you didn’t know the cocaine was there), constructive possession issues (the cocaine wasn’t on your person), and challenging the lab analysis of the substance.
• Protect Your Rights: An attorney ensures your constitutional rights are protected throughout the legal process.

About W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr.

Tampa criminal defense attorney W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. has dedicated his career to defending individuals facing drug charges in Florida. (https://drug2go.com/). He is a former drug crimes prosecutor and has a deep understanding of Florida drug laws and a proven track record of success. He is committed to providing aggressive and compassionate representation to his clients. See his qualifications here. (https://drug2go.com/)

Get a Free Consultation – Contact Us Today:

If you or a family member has been charged with DRUG1100 Possession of Cocaine in Tampa, don’t wait to seek legal help. Contact the Law Office of W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. for a free, confidential consultation. Call us at 1-877-793-9290 or fill out our online contact form. (https://drug2go.com/contact-casey-the-lawyer/

You can contact the Law Office of W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. for a free consultation by calling 1-877-793-9290 or by filling out our online contact form. (https://drug2go.com/contact-casey-the-lawyer/).

FAQ: Cocaine Possession Charges (DRUG1100) in Tampa, Florida

What is DRUG1100?

DRUG1100 is the Florida code for Possession of Cocaine, a felony offense under Florida Statute 893.13.

Is possession of cocaine always a felony in Florida?

Yes, possession of any amount of cocaine is a felony in Florida. Simple possession is typically a third-degree felony, but it can be enhanced to a first-degree felony under certain circumstances, such as possession within 1,000 feet of a public housing facility, school, park, or other designated areas.

What’s the difference between a third-degree and a first-degree felony?

The penalties are significantly different. A third-degree felony carries up to 5 years in prison, while a first-degree felony carries up to 30 years in prison.

What if I didn’t know the cocaine was there?

“Lack of knowledge” can be a valid defense. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you knowingly possessed the cocaine. If you genuinely were unaware of its presence (e.g., it was in a borrowed car or a friend’s bag), your attorney can argue this.

What is “constructive possession”?

Constructive possession means the drugs were not found on your person (e.g., in your pocket), but were found in a place where you had control over them (e.g., in your car’s glove compartment). To prove constructive possession, the prosecution must show you knew about the drugs and had the ability to exercise control over them.

What if the police searched me illegally?

If the police violated your Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure, your attorney can file a motion to suppress the evidence. If successful, the evidence (the cocaine) cannot be used against you, and the charges may be dismissed.

Are there any diversion programs for cocaine possession?

Depending on your prior criminal history and the specific circumstances of your case, you may be eligible for a drug court program or a pre-trial intervention (PTI) program. These programs typically involve treatment, counseling, and supervision. Successful completion can result in the charges being dismissed.

Will a cocaine possession conviction affect my job?

Yes, a felony conviction can have a significant impact on your employment prospects. Many employers conduct background checks, and a drug conviction can make it difficult to find a job or maintain professional licenses.

How can a lawyer help me with a DRUG1100 charge?

A lawyer can:

Investigate the facts of your case.
Identify legal defenses.
Negotiate with the prosecutor.
Represent you in court.
Protect your rights throughout the process.
Help you understand your options and make informed decisions.

How do I contact W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr.?

Contact us online or you can reach the Law Office of W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. for a free consultation by calling 813-222-2220.

Possession of Cocaine

If you have been charged with DRUG1100 POSSESSION OF COCAINE you can call a Defense Attorney Tampa at 1-877-793-9290 and tell me your story.

Form Code: DRUG1100

Florida Statute: 893.13.1F
Level: Fel (Felony)
Degree: 3rd
Description: POSSESSION OF COCAINE

DRUG1100 POSSESSION OF COCAINE is often charged in Hillsborough County, Florida.

Title XLVI CRIMES
Chapter 893 DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL
893.13 Prohibited acts; penalties.
(1)(f) Except as authorized by this chapter, it is unlawful for any person to sell, manufacture, or deliver, or possess with intent to sell, manufacture, or deliver, a controlled substance in, on, or within 1,000 feet of the real property comprising a public housing facility at any time. For purposes of this section, the term “real property comprising a public housing facility” means real property, as defined in s. 421.03(12), of a public corporation created as a housing authority pursuant to part I of chapter 421. Any person who violates this paragraph with respect to:
1. A controlled substance named or described in s. 893.03(1)(a), (1)(b), (1)(d), (2)(a), (2)(b), or (2)(c)4., commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
2. A controlled substance named or described in s. 893.03(1)(c), (2)(c)1., (2)(c)2., (2)(c)3., (2)(c)5., (2)(c)6., (2)(c)7., (2)(c)8., (2)(c)9., (3), or (4) commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
3. Any other controlled substance, except as lawfully sold, manufactured, or delivered, must be sentenced to pay a $500 fine and to serve 100 hours of public service in addition to any other penalty prescribed by law.
Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220

Florida Statute § 893.135  Cocaine Minimum Mandatory Sentences

The Florida Statutes on Cocaine provide harsh minimum mandatory sentences that kick-in at 28 grams. The trafficking stakes become higher when 400 grams or 10,000 plants are alleged and proven by admissible evidence to a jury and/or sentencing judge in Florida State Courts.

Trafficking

Knowingly sells, purchases, manufactures, delivers, or brings into the state, or who is knowingly in actual or constructive possession of Cocaine:

Drug Amount                          Mandatory Minimum Sentence & Fine

28 – 200 grams                          3 years, $50,000 fine

200 – 400 grams                        7 years, $100,000 fine

400 grams – 150 kilograms        15 years, $250,000 fine

Contact Casey – Fighting for you or a friend. Law Office of W.F. ”Casey” Ebsary Jr 2102 W Cleveland St Tampa, Florida 33606 (813) 222-2220