Articles Posted in Car Theft

It is not uncommon for a person to be charged with multiple crimes following a single criminal episode. While the government can convict a person for more than one offense after one criminal transaction, it cannot violate their protections against double jeopardy. Thus, if their convictions constitute multiple convictions for the same crime, they may be unlawful. Recently, a Florida court assessed whether a defendant’s convictions for burglary and grand theft of a motor vehicle violated double jeopardy, ultimately ruling that it did not. If you are charged with a theft crime, it is important to understand your rights, and you should speak to a skilled Tampa theft charge defense lawyer as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant, a juvenile, was charged with burglary of an unoccupied conveyance and grand theft of a vehicle. The charges against him stemmed from a single incident. An adjudicatory hearing was held, after which the court determined beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the charged offenses. The defendant appealed, arguing that because burglary was a lesser included offense of grand theft of a motor vehicle, his convictions violated double jeopardy.

Assessing Whether Multiple Convictions Violate Double Jeopardy

The court disagreed with the defendant’s arguments and affirmed his convictions. The court explained that the dispositive issue in determining whether multiple convictions arising from the same criminal transaction violate double jeopardy is whether the legislature intended to authorize separate penalties for the two crimes. Continue Reading ›

Most people charged with a crime assert their innocence. In some cases, though, a person will choose to plead guilty for various reasons. While criminal defendants have the right to enter a guilty plea if they do, the courts take great measures to ensure that their plea is made voluntarily and with full knowledge of its consequences. Thus, it can be difficult for a defendant to establish that they did not understand the implications of their choice. This was illustrated in a recent Florida carjacking case in which the court rejected the defendant’s challenge to his guilty plea. If you are accused of committing a theft crime, it is smart to speak to a Tampa theft crime defense attorney to evaluate your options for seeking a just outcome.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant was charged with carjacking and aiding and abetting carjacking. He pleaded guilty to both charges and was convicted. After he was sentenced, he appealed, arguing, among other things, that his guilty plea was not entered knowingly and voluntarily. The appellate court rejected his arguments and affirmed his convictions.

Many crimes, including theft, contain an element of intent. In other words, the State must show that a defendant charged with an intent crime possessed the required mental state at the time the offense was committed; otherwise, the defendant should not be convicted. The evidence needed to demonstrate intent in a case in which a defendant is charged with theft was the topic of a recent Florida opinion, in a matter in which the defendant appealed his convictions for numerous crimes. If you are accused of theft or any other offense, it is in your best interest to talk to a knowledgeable Tampa theft defense attorney regarding your rights.

The Alleged Crimes

It is reported that on the night of the Super Bowl in 2017, the defendant, a friend, and the victim went to the victim’s house to search for ammunition and guns. They discussed seeking revenge on another person who burglarized the defendant’s. The following night, the victim was sitting outside when he heard gunshots. He then saw individuals get into the friend’s car. The car was later stopped by the police, and the defendant fell out of the backseat, reporting he had been shot.

Allegedly, the defendant’s blood and belongings were found inside of a car that had been stolen and abandoned on the highway. Surveillance video later revealed that three individuals were shot and killed in the victim’s backyard, including the person that the defendant sought revenge against, and the defendant’s car was parked nearby. The defendant was charged with and convicted of multiple homicide crimes and grand theft auto. During the trial, he moved for acquittal on the theft charge, but the court denied his motion. He appealed, arguing in part that the State did not prove he required the specific intent needed to commit theft.

Continue Reading ›

One of the most important things that anyone charged with a Florida theft crime should know is that the burden is at all times on prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed the crime. That means they have to prove more than just a hunch, and they have to do more than show that you probably committed the crime. As the state’s Second District Court of Appeals recently explained, that means in auto theft cases that prosecutors have to show that the car in which the person charged was caught is the car that was stolen.One afternoon in May 2016, a man drove a silver Dodge Dart to his aunt’s house in Tampa. He came to retrieve some paperwork from his cousin. He left keys in the car – a rental – along with his cell phone, his wallet, and a bag of clothes. He also left the car windows down. The car was gone when he returned a few minutes later. He contacted police but wasn’t able to remember the vehicle’s license plate number.

The following night, a Tampa police officer observed a silver Dodge Dart roll through a stop sign, make a quick lane change, and make several quick turns before running another couple of stop signs. The three people inside the car – two men and one woman – jumped out and started running away when the officer approached. The officer eventually apprehended the woman, identified in court documents as “VG.” She was arrested and charged with grand theft auto and burglary, among other charges.

VG appealed the conviction, arguing that prosecutors never proved that the car from which she fled was the same vehicle that was stolen from the man. She said she didn’t know who owned the car and simply fled because the man behind the wheel said “we gotta jump out.” VG’s lawyer also pointed out that the prosecutors did not match the car’s license plate or Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) with the rental car. The Second District agreed.