A New York Criminal Lawyer said the appellant of this case is the State of Florida. The state of Florida is being represented by the attorney general, Robert L. Shevin, and the assistant attorney general, Richard W. Prospect. The appellee in the case is Gregory Dean Bradley. He is being represented by public defender, Michael J. Minerva, and assistant public defender, Janice G. Scott.
The case is being heard in the first district of the District Court of Appeal in the state of Florida. The judge overseeing the case is Boyer.
The appellant in this case, the state of Florida is appealing the order for dismissing information and the case against the defendant or appellant in this case. The basis for the appeal is that the case was a juvenile case and not a case that should have been subject to indictment as an adult.
In the original case there was a petition filed against the defendant for shoplifting and for possessing over five grams of marijuana. In addition, there was a petition of delinquency filed against the defendant. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the state made the motion to move the case to a circuit court and this motion was granted to the state of Florida. Afterwards, the state also filed additional information about the defendant that charged him with possessing over five grams of marijuana. At the time the state of Florida did not try to have the defendant tried as an adult in the case of shoplifting.
The shoplifting charge was tried in a separate procedure. In this case the judge convicted the defendant on the shoplifting charge and ordered him to serve time in a Youth Services Program. The defendant has made a motion to dismiss the charge of having more than five grams of marijuana. He basis this motion on the fact that he has made a commitment to the Youth Services Program and that he was amenable to treatment as a juvenile. He states that waiving his juvenile jurisdiction in the marijuana case was improper.
In the original trial case, a New York Sex Crimes Lawyer said the court agreed with the defendant and dismissed the possession of marijuana case that was against him. The court stated that this interfered with the jurisdiction of the defendant as a juvenile by trying him as an adult. This is the judgment that the state is seeking to be reversed.
We will rule in favor of the state and reverse the previous order made by the circuit court. We find that the juvenile referral in the case of shoplifting did not automatically divest the interest of the court’s jurisdiction in the case of the possession of marijuana.
This court understands that the adult court may find that the reasonable rehabilitation is being made through the juvenile court and may consider waiving juvenile jurisdiction in this case. However, currently the only rehabilitation that has been shown in the juvenile court is that dealing with the shoplifting charge and not with the issue of using marijuana. A New York Drug Crimes Lawyer said evidence of drug rehabilitation is necessary before this charge may be dropped in the adult court.
When you find yourself in need of legal advice, Stephen Bilkis & Associates can help. We offer free consultations to help you decide what type of legal action you should take in your particular case. We have several offices in the metropolitan area of Manhattan for your convenience. Call us today to set up your appointment.