Criminal Defense News

“Super Speeders” are treated as extreme offenders — and enforcement is already underway across Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties by the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) and local sheriff’s offices. Florida “Super Speeder” Law (§ 316.1922) By W.F. Casey Ebsary Jr., Board-Certified Criminal Trial LawyerLaw Office of W.F. Casey Ebsary Jr. — Tampa, Florida📞 Contact Us…

Cell phone tower evidence defense lawyer in Tampa notes that Cell phone tracking data has become a cornerstone of modern criminal cases, but its presentation in court is often flawed and misleading. We cut through the confusion surrounding Call Data Records (CDRs), cell tower coverage, and the “widely accepted methodologies” that can lead to wrongful conclusions. If your case involves cell phone evidence, understanding the vast difference between an accurate, scientific exhibit and a biased, “wedge”-shaped depiction is critical to your defense. Don’t let flawed technology send you to jail—contact experienced attorney W. F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr. today for a free consultation to review your cell phone tracking evidence and build a rigorous defense. Call us at (813) 222-2220 or visit our Contact Page.

If you or your loved one was arrested by the University Police Department (USFPD) at the University of South Florida (USF), it’s critical to contact an experienced Tampa criminal defense lawyer immediately. These arrests can lead to charges ranging from DUI and drug possession to battery, theft, or resisting arrest — all carrying serious consequences for your academic career and future.

In criminal defense, virtually every case hinges on the Fourth Amendment and whether law enforcement overstepped its bounds in gathering evidence against you. The constitutional test for justifying a search is a robust one: the totality of the circumstances. This means that courts must look at the “whole picture” of the facts leading to a search and seizure, avoiding reliance on any single, isolated fact.

Attorney W.F. “Casey” Ebsary Jr., a Board-Certified Criminal Trial Lawyer in Florida, is already defending clients charged under Florida’s expanded fleeing and eluding law 316.1935. HB 113 (House Bill 113 jargon for new law in Florida), effective in 2025, significantly increases penalties for anyone who fails to stop when directed by law enforcement. These changes affect everything from slow-speed evasions to high-speed chases, including motorcycles, ATVs, golf carts, and other off-road vehicles.

The intersection of Florida medical marijuana laws and federal firearm prohibitions has created one of the most important constitutional battles of our time. Thousands of Floridians hold valid medical marijuana cards under Article X, Section 29 of the Florida Constitution and Chapter 381, Florida Statutes, allowing them to treat chronic conditions lawfully under state law. Yet, under federal law, these same patients are labeled as “unlawful users of a controlled substance” and face a complete ban on firearm possession under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d)(3) and (g)(3).

Being charged with passing a worthless check, especially under WOCK3015 – Worthless Check (Business Account), is a serious matter in Florida. These cases often involve allegations that a business wrote a check without sufficient funds in its account, leading to possible misdemeanor or felony charges under Florida Statute 832.05. While some cases are misunderstandings, prosecutors can be aggressive in pursuing charges because they view them as both theft-related and fraudulent.

In today’s digital world, people frequently turn to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and other platforms to vent frustration, make jokes, or engage in heated debates. But how far is too far? Under Florida law, certain posts—especially those that involve threats of violence—can be prosecuted as true threats. Even if the author insists they were “just joking” or exaggerating, courts can and do interpret online comments as criminal threats.

In a nation founded on the principles of free expression and the right to petition the government, the interplay between individual liberties and the need for public order is a constant legal frontier. This delicate balance often comes into sharp focus during public meetings, where citizens exercise their right to voice concerns and engage with elected officials. A recent decision from Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal, Rodney Keith Jones v. State of Florida, shines a critical light on these fundamental rights, particularly concerning charges of disturbing a lawful assembly and resisting arrest.

In June 2025, the Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal reversed a county court ruling that had improperly evicted a domestic violence injunction holder from a shared residence. The core legal issue: Can a landlord evict someone when a circuit court has already granted that person exclusive possession of the home under a temporary domestic violence injunction?