Please Read the following before entering the section of our site called past cases. Pursuant to the Florida Bar Rules, Berman & Tsombanakis, LLC can not make statements that create an unjustified expectation of success. (4-7.2(b)(1)(B) ) the exception to that rule is when the information if provided or furnished at the request of the perspective client and/or existing client.
If you are interested in viewing information about the criminal lawyers results and possible testimonials about the criminal defense firm, please read and acknowledge the information below. The following section contains information about the criminal attorney’s past results, and possible statements about the quality of work Berman & Tsombanakis produce. This information has not been provided nor has it been reviewed by the Florida Bar.
The following sections on past criminal cases that Berman & Tsombanakis have handled are not testimonials, nor are they to be considered testimonials. They are simply a history of events that are well documented with the criminal clerk of courts in the perspective jurisdictions. They do not all reference State or Federal criminal successes, in fact some of the criminal cases are examples where Berman & Tsombanakis felt the criminal court ruled incorrectly and they may be before a criminal Appellate Court. These examples of past cases handled are not to be construed as an example of what may or may not happen on your particular State or Federal Criminal case. This disclosure is being made with the intent to adhere to any and all Florida Bar Rules considering advertising.
By clicking I agree at the bottom of the page you are agreeing that you wish to learn more about the type of cases Berman & Tsombanakis have handled in the past and some commentary on the results of those cases. You should know that:
The facts and circumstances of your case may differ significantly from the matters in which the criminal results and testimonials have been provided. All results of cases handled by Berman & Tsombanakis are not provided. The results on the following pages are not necessarily representative of the results obtained by the criminal defense lawyer or of the experience of all or others that have hired Berman & Tsombanakis. Again every State and Federal criminal case is different and must be evaluated and handled on its on merits.
The information provided in this article is for educational purposes. The content of any advertisement noted in this article may constitute the intellectual property of the advertising lawyer or another person and use of any of the content of the advertisements may require permission of the copyright holder. If you have any questions regarding lawyer advertising, call the Ethics Hotline at 1-800-235-8619 and we will assist you. You may also review the advertising rules and sample advertisements on the Bar’s web site at www.floridabar.org
I have read and understood the above information and would like to view the information to find out more about Berman & Tsombanakis’s State and Federal criminal cases.
Defendant was charged with attempted first degree murder and possession of a firearm by convicted felon. Counts I and II were severed and we went to trial on Count I. On October 3rd, after a weeklong trial, the jury found the Defendant not guilty in about thirty minutes. We then filed a motion to dismiss the second count, alleging no jury could find him guilty of possessing a firearm because the first jury found he did not possess one. That count was later dismissed.
State v. Slaymon:
Defendant was charged with armed robbery with a firearm. The victims of the robbery were convicted in federal court of human trafficking on a different case. After filing motions in limine to exclude the identification, the case got dismissed
State v. Johnsen:
Defendant was charged with Grand Theft in the second degree. The crime was not charged until 4 years and 10 months after the alleged incident occurred, just shy of the 5 year statute of limitations. During the discovery process, we were able to gather information regarding numerous investigations into these alleged victims. We filed a Motion to Dismiss the Information based on a violation of Ms. Johnsen’s constitutional rights. That motion was granted and the case was dismissed.
State v. McCrary:
Defendant was charged with Resisting an Officer Without Violence. After we announced ready for trial, the state dismissed the case.
State v. Reid:
Defendant was on probation when arrested for Burglary of Dwelling. We filed a motion to suppress for the violation of probation (VOP). The court agreed that there was no probable cause to arrest the Defendant and granted the motion to suppress. The court also dismissed the VOP. The underlying case was then dismissed.
State v. Tonietti:
Defendant was charged with domestic violence battery, allegedly against his ex wife. The state agreed to drop the case after we were above to show that this was a fake accusation that arose out of a child custody battle.
State v. Mcreed:
Defendant had 2 cases of sale or delivery. State was offering 1.5 years prison, which was the bottom of the sentencing guidelines. We found a witness who would partially exonerate the Defendant on one of the charges. The other charge was going to be difficult to beat. Due to our witness, the state agreed to allow the Defendant to participate in the post adjudicatory Drug Court program on both cases. This allowed the defendant to avoid any incarceration and got him the drug treatment he needed to clean his life up.
State v. Gamali:
Defendant was charged with upwards of 12 counts of grand theft in the 2nd and 3rd degree. He scored out to nearly 4 years of prison and faced a maximum penalty of over 75 years. We negotiated a complex restitution deal with the State Attorney’s office economic crimes division to pay back the alleged victims and keep the Defendant from serving any additional jail time.
State v. Boyd:
Defendant was charged with Kidnapping, Armed Robbery, and Sexual Battery and faced up to life in prison. We were able to severely discredit the alleged victim of the crimes and also show that she was not telling the truth. The victim then refused to come back to court to testify at the trial. After 3 days of trial, with the State’s case beginning to fall apart on the 2 major charges, the State agreed to dismiss the Kidnapping and Armed Robbery charge and offered a deal to have the Defendant receive a withhold of adjudication (no conviction) to a reduced charge of attempted robbery.
State v. Prichard:
Defendant was charged with Sale and Delivery of Cocaine with a maximum sentence of up to 15 years in prison. Under his previous attorney, the State Attorney’s only offer was 2 years in prison. The Defendant retained Daniel Berman and he was able to negotiate a deal with the Judge and State Attorney where the defendant received probation and no jail time at all.
State v. Northcut:
Defendant was charged with Sale and Delivery of Cocaine. Before retaining Daniel Berman, the offer under his previous lawyer was 3 years+ in prison. We filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence and set it for hearing. After the State evaluated our Motion, they reduced their offer to probation and no jail time. The Defendant successfully completed half his probation and moved the court to terminate his probation early, which was granted.