JOHN T.
FLOYD LAW
FIRM
Federal Criminal Defense
Lawyer
EXPERIENCED FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWYER
TRIALS, SENTENCINGS, AND APPEALS
SERIOUS FEDERAL CRIMINAL DEFENSE
Phone (713) 224-0101
E-mail jfloyd@JohnTFloyd.com
"Serious Federal Criminal
Defense Throughout Texas
"
Federal Criminal Lawyer
Houston Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer John T. Floyd is an experienced attorney whose practice is dedicated exclusively to protecting the rights of individuals and businesses suspected or accused of committing serious federal crimes before federal courts in Houston, throughout Texas and the United States of America.
Comments on Current Events In Criminal Law from the Federal Criminal Courts in the United State
May 07, 2012
THE SHIFTING LANDSCAPE OF THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE
Courts of Appeal Continue Struggle with Crawford and Progeny
By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair
Reinaldo Berrios, Troy Moore, Angel Rodriquez, and Felix Cruz were charged, and ultimately convicted, of a series of violent felonies in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands in 2004, including the murder of an off-duty police officer during an attempted robbery. They were sentenced to consecutive life sentences and dozens of years in both federal court and Virgin Island courts. The sentencing message in these cases was evident: the felons would spend the rest of their lives in prison.
That’s why the appeal of their convictions were so important—appeals that focused primarily on a claimed constitutional violation of the Confrontation Clause. While Berrios and Moore were housed in a detention facility in Guaynabo, Puerto Rico, the Government sought, and secured, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2510, a Title III surveillance application to monitor the conversations of the two pre-trial detainees. The surveillance included both video and sound recordings. A treasure trove of incriminating evidence was obtained through this surveillance method. In one captured conversation as the two men enjoyed the facility’s “recreational yard,” Berrios and Moore discussed the shooting of the off-duty police officer, their respective roles in the killing, and their getaway. Referring to him by nickname, the two men identified Rodriquez as the getaway driver. And, as if that was not enough, Moore threatened to kill someone who worked at a store with his girlfriend and who was being regularly interrogated by the police.
The Title III recorded conversations between Berrios and Moore formed what the Third Circuit Court of Appeals called earlier this month “the cornerstone of the prosecution’s case against Rodriquez, Cruz, and Moore. The Third Circuit elected to use this case as its precedent ruling to resolve a number of issues surrounding the Confrontation Clause in the wake of a number of Supreme Court rulings (rulings we have discussed here and here).
In 1980 the Supreme Court handed down the definitive application of the Confrontation Clause in crime cases in Ohio v. Roberts. In that case, the Court laid down what became known as the “indicia of reliability” test—an absent witness’s hearsay statements could be used in a criminal trial only if 1) the witness was unavailable at time of trial and 2) if the statements offered an “indicia of reliability,” which fell either in “a firmly rooted hearsay exception” or the prosecution made a showing of “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.”
The Roberts test remained the constitutional standard until twenty-four years later when the Supreme Court handed down Crawford v. Washington, which held
That, in order for “testimonial” evidence to be admissible, the Confrontation Clause of Sixth Amendment demands unavailability of the witness and a prior opportunity for cross-examination. Crawford did not include a comprehensive definition of ‘testimonial,’ but it noted that testimonial evidence includes, among other things, prior testimony at a preliminary hearing, before a grand jury, or at a former trial; and to police interrogations.
Crawford did not end the Supreme Court’s assault on Roberts. In a trilogy of subsequent cases, the Court overruled Roberts entirely. First, in 2006, the Court handed down Davis v. Washington, which explicitly held that the Confrontation Clause applies to “testimonial” hearsay statements and not to “non-testimonial” hearsay statements whose admissibility is governed solely by Federal or state rules of evidence. The Court held that statements are nontestimonial when made in the course of police interrogation under circumstances “objectively indicating that the primary purpose of interrogation is to enable police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency. They are testimonial when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no such ongoing emergency, and that the primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.” Crawford and Davis, however, left untouched the longstanding rule of the Court’s decision in Cruz v. New York that a non-testifying co-defendant’s confession must be excluded, even when it only corroborates the defendant’s own confession. more...
Houston Federal Lawyer John T. Floyd is a true patriot who believes in the Constitution of the United States, the Bill of Rights and the fundamental importance of a fair and impartial court system.
In this day and time where the government knows no bounds to its power in pursuit of the accused and where the citizenry has voluntarily abdicated their freedoms to seek shelter from what they have been told is an ever increasingly dangerous world, it is vital that the accused be represented by a knowledgeable and zealous federal criminal defense lawyer.
Criminal Defense Lawyer John T. Floyd understands that the defense of the accused is the front line in the fight to preserve the vitality of the Constitution and the freedoms derived from its protections.
If You Have Been Contacted By The FBI Or Any Other Federal Law Enforcement Agent Stand Firm in Your Constitutional Right to Remain Silent:
It is normal to become overwhelmed when confronted by the FBI, or any other federal law enforcement investigator, and threatened with prosecution in federal courts. This shock becomes more so when threatened with the serious range of imprisonment dictated by federal statutes, where there is no real parole and most individuals convicted serve at least 85% of their sentence.
It is also normal for people to feel they must try to talk there way out of the situation or to immediately confess and begin to “cooperate” with federal investigators who have promised leniency.
However, it is vitally important for an individual suspected of committing a crime and approached by federal law enforcement investigators to immediately remain silent until they have had an opportunity to consult an experienced federal criminal defense lawyer.
First, it is a serious federal crime to make false statements to a federal investigator, a crime which alone can lead to prison time. Second, law enforcement investigators have no authority to make promises about plea agreements, deals or leniency. Unfortunately, law enforcement agents often tell suspects they do have such authority in order to get confessions and cooperation. This is a successful and court approved police interrogation tactic. However, this means that suspects often confess with little or no leniency and receive no value for there cooperation.
Therefore, if you believe you are the target or suspect in a criminal investigation, or may face any exposure to criminal prosecution, contact an experienced federal criminal defense lawyer immediately. This will most likely be the most important decision you make during this potentially devastating time of your life.
Look at what you’re up against.
There are over a hundred federal agencies and offices with agents who have authority to carry firearms, investigate crimes and make arrests. The most popularly known federal law enforcement agents are from the FBI, the DEA or IRS. However other federal agencies are increasingly conducting criminal investigations, especially prominent in the post 9/11 environment is ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, whose primary mission has become to prevent acts of terrorism by targeting the people, money and materials that support terrorist and criminal activities. Other agents working on criminal prosecutions in federal courts are from the United States Postal Service, Secret Service, Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Marshall, ATF and many other federal agencies. If you are questioned by any of these agencies you must remember that false statements made to federal law enforcement agents is a federal crime and that the agents have no authority to make you a “deal” in exchange for cooperating. Therefore, do not speak to a federal law enforcement agent without a lawyer.
If you are arrested by a federal law enforcement agent you will be taken to a federal magistrate to determine if there is probable cause to believe that you committed a crime and whether or not you should be released on bail or detained pending resolution of the criminal case. The Preliminary Hearing and Detention Hearing are both significant events which will allow your lawyer to get an early look at some of the important evidence in your case. Therefore, if you are arrested and taken into federal custody, contact a lawyer with experience before the federal courts immediately.
After a federal defendant is arrested and released on bond, or detained, pending trial the federal court will enter a scheduling order which will often include deadlines for pre-trial motions and discovery, plea agreements and trial dates. The federal courts are controlled by the Federal Speedy Trial Act which requires that an indictment be filed within 30 days of arrest and that trial must commence within 70 days from date the indictment was filed.
Sentencing in the federal courts is done solely by the judges, as opposed to the judge or jury in state court, who still must consider the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. While recent Supreme Court and Court of Appeals cases have made the Guidelines advisory, because sentences that fall within the guidelines are presumed reasonable and most likely protected from successful appeal, most judge’s still rely on guidelines and depart only in unusual circumstances or by agreement of the parties.
The recent cases affecting the sentencing guideline do not affect mandatory minimum sentencing laws that impose harsh minimum sentences on certain crimes involving drugs, weapons and crimes of violence.
The guidelines can be cruel and often fail to take into account the individual circumstances of the defendant. Therefore, because of harsh sentences, coupled with the fact that there is no parole in the federal system, it is important that a defendant’s sentence be fought just as vigorously as the guilt/innocence phase of the trial.
Therefore, if you are charged with a criminal offense before the federal courts, it is important to retain an experienced federal criminal defense lawyer to help you wade thru its complicated codes, rules and procedures. The federal courts and their unique set of priorities are significantly different than state courts. It is vital that a defendant charged in federal courts have a lawyer that appreciates these differences and can use them to the defendant’s advantage. All too often, defendants are represented by good intentioned lawyers who only practice in state courts and miss valuable opportunities for the most positive outcome of their client’s case.
John T. Floyd is an experienced Federal Criminal defense Lawyer who has fought against prosecutors in state and federal courts for over 10 years. Mr. Floyd has significant contacts throughout the United States and can tailor a defense to the unique needs and abilities of any client. He can quickly assemble a team of lawyers and experts together to present a vigorous defense any government prosecutor would find formidable.
If you have any further questions, or would like to discuss your case further, please contact a dedicated Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer by phone at 713-224-0101 or by e-mail at jfloyd@JohnTFloyd.com
Houston Federal Criminal Lawyer John T. Floyd represents individuals and businesses in Federal Courts in Houston and throughout the United States.
Serious Federal Criminal Defense Throughout the United States
FEDERAL
CRIMINAL ATTORNEY
|
[ Back to top ]
