Search Site
Menu
423 S. Hyde Park Avenue | Tampa, Florida 33606
Call For A Free Consultation 813-289-0600
Successes

Successes

With nearly over 35 years of legal experience, criminal defense attorney Victor Martinez has achieved a distinguished record of successes on behalf of his clients.

Below is a representative sampling of historical cases in which our office has obtained a not guilty verdict or  judgment of acquittal. These results are for your informational purposes only and should not be construed in any way as a promise or guarantee of a similar outcome in your particular case. Every case is unique and should be evaluated according to the specific facts and circumstances involved.

Disclaimer:

Every legal matter is different. The outcome of each legal case depends upon many factors, including the facts of the case, and no attorney can guarantee a positive result in any particular case.

The Florida Bar does not approve or review the case results. The facts and circumstances of your case may differ from those of the cases discussed here. Not all results are provided. The case results discussed here are not necessarily representative of the results obtained in all cases.

Featured and Noteworthy Cases:

Federal Criminal Cases – United States District Court

1. Case: Client, a businessman was accused of purchasing $1,000,000.00 worth of counterfeit Levi Jeans from a China factory and then attempting to sell them as legitimate in the United States.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

Theory of Defense: Client understood product to be legitimate, there was no recognizable obvious counterfeiting and client’s purchase price, while a bargain, was not so low as to suggest that product must have been counterfeit.


2. Case: Client, a Fort Lauderdale business man was found in possession of a counterfeit passport that contained his correct photograph but a false name and address.  He was charged with passport fraud.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division.

Theory of Defense: Client’s passport and other important identifying information and documents were accessible to secretary and other high-level employees at his place of business.  The altered U.S. Passport could have been altered by others.


3. Case: Client, an Ocala rancher (according to cooperating government witnesses) allegedly used his company trucks to transport and to traffic in large quantities of cocaine.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

Theory of Defense: Allegations were made by others who had been charged with drug trafficking offenses and whose truthful cooperation was suspect given the motive to lie to reduce witnesses’ own sentences.


4. Case: Client, a Naples Physician Assistant was found in possession of pre-signed prescription pads. These prescriptions were allegedly sold for profit. Large quantities of prescription pain killers were contended by government witnesses to have been sold and distributed by client.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

Theory of Defense: The prescription pads although pre-signed did bear the legitimate signature of client’s supervising physician.  The regulatory procedures were administrative, not criminal. Absent proof of specific “criminal intent” jury had reasonable doubt as to client’s guilt.


5. Case: Client, a South Florida business man was indicted for allegedly possessing and trafficking in thousands of counterfeit Rolex watches.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Ft. Lauderdale Division.

Theory of Defense: Client testified that he acted in good-faith and without knowledge of any fraud.


6. Case:  Client, a Sarasota record producer was indicted for illegally transporting his German girlfriend to Florida in violation of Federal Immigration laws.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trail in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

Theory of Defense: Client was unaware of the immigration prohibition.  Accordingly, client relied on false statements made to him by his girlfriend and therefore he lacked necessary criminal intent.


7. Case: Client was one of nine Defendants indicted for conspiracy to posses with intent to distribute over 1000 pounds of marijuana on board a vessel while subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Key West Division.

Theory of Defense: The defendants had no knowledge of the existence of a hidden cargo compartment on board the vessel in which the marijuana was located.


8. Case: Client, a Columbian business woman was charged with possession with intent to distribute 2 kilos of cocaine found in her luggage by DEA agents at Miami International Airport as client entered the United States through customs.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division.

Theory of Defense: Members of clients’ family had been kidnapped by drug cartel and threatened with death if client did not act as courier. Accordingly, client had been “coerced” to assist the cartel and was acting only under “duress”.


9. Case: Client, a Fort Lauderdale Business Investor was charged with conspiracy to defraud investors whose monetary investments were part of a Ponzi scheme.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Fort Lauderdale Division.

Theory of Defense: Investment business was owned by three brothers and there was no proof that client had knowledge of the Ponzi Scheme or was the responsible party for maintaining the financial records of the Investment Business.


10. Case: Client, a Fort Lauderdale Accountant was indicted for conspiracy to commit loan fraud after false and material representations were made concerning assets on his home mortgage loan application.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Fort Lauderdale Division.

Theory of Defense:  Client was on several different prescription medications and the combination or “synergistic” effects of these medications clouded his judgment and did not permit client to possess the necessary criminal intent to have committed the offense.


11. Case: Client charged with conspiracy to transport firearms.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

Theory of Defense: The Government (through undercover agents) not only suggested the client participate in offense but also pressured client to do so by playing on his financial hardships and fragile emotional state.  Accordingly, Client was victim of entrapment.


12. Case: Client charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute over 5 kilograms of cocaine.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, South District of Florida, Miami Division.

Theory of Defense:  The jury had reasonable doubt as to guilt of client after evidence demonstrated that the vast majority of the tape recorded conversations with undercover DEA agents were between other co-conspirators and that the client was “merely present” at the scene of the controlled purchase by DEA. Since there is no thing as “guilt by association” in the United States the jury had reasonable doubt as to client’s guilt.


13. Case: Client was one of 6 correctional officers charged with conspiracy to commit murder and civil rights violations of an inmate housed at the State of Florida, Zephyrhills Correctional Institution.

Outcome: Not guilty verdict after trial for all 6 defendants on all Counts. U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Fort Myers Division.

Theory of Defense:  Correctional officers acted in self-defense .


14. Case:  Client, a college student in Tallahassee was traveling to Orlando on the interstate in a rental car and was stopped in Orange County for a traffic violation.  K-9 dogs alerted to vehicle and a search revealed 2 kilos of cocaine hidden in the trunk and out of any ordinary inspection sight.

Outcome:  Not guilty verdict after trial in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division.

Theory of Defense:  The vehicle was a rental car and a previous driver (someone other than client) could have hidden the drugs in the vehicle without client’s knowledge prior to client renting vehicle.


15. Case: Client, a George businessman attempted to bring 2 firearms on board a cruise ship in Port Canaveral, in violation of Federal Law.

Outcome: Judgment of Acquittal. (Not Guilty Verdict entered by District Court at close of evidence)

Theory of Defense:  The Government failed to prove that the client had not given written Notice to the cruise line of his intention to bring firearms on board. Since the Government failed to prove this (which was an essential element of the offense) a Motion for Acquittal was granted by the U.S. District Court Judge, Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division.


16. Case: Client, a Tampa woman was indicted for conspiracy to Possess with intent to Distribute over 1000 marijuana plants.

Outcome: Judgment of Acquittal. (Not Guilty Verdict entered by District Court at close of evidence)

Theory of Defense:  The Government failed to prove the existence of a conspiracy between the co-Defendants with regard to an essential element of the offense, to wit: that the offense involved “1000 plants or more”. U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.


17. Case: Client, a Palm Beach Engineer was indicted for IRS violations of knowingly and willfully failing to pay over $100,000 in taxes owed.

Outcome: Judgment of Acquittal. (Not Guilty Verdict entered by U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, West Palm Beach Division. at close of evidence)

Theory of Defense: Client had consulted with a tax attorney who had given client incorrect legal advice regarding money owed to the IRS, and accordingly client had an absolute “Reliance on Counsel Defense”.


18. Case: Client charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm.

Outcome: Hung jury. U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division.

Theory of Defense: The jury could not unanimously agree as to client’s guilt after learning that even though the Client was present at gun shop and inquired as to price of certain firearms from sales associate. Client only did so in order to become more knowledgeable so as to be able to advise Client’s sister as to which firearm she should purchase. Jury could not reach a unanimous verdict and a mistrial was declared.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

19. Case: Client was charged with attempted murder, after he was captured on video tape security surveillance shooting at the victim.

Outcome: Charges Dismissed

Theory of Defense: Client’s identical twin brother could have been the assailant whose image was captured on video. Charges dismissed after foreign depositions of the twin brother were conducted in Mexico, where the twin resided in non-extradition status. The twin brother asserted his 5th Amendment privilege as to all events surrounding shooting. Charges were dismissed by State Attorney after deposition. Hillsborough County State Attorney’s Office, Florida.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

20. Case: Clients were two physicians being investigated by the DEA and FBI for internet medicine fraud. The Government charged that prescriptions were written for no legitimate medical purpose. Total of 150,000 prescriptions were alleged to have been written in physicians’ names.

Outcome: No charges filed by U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Maryland, Baltimore Division.

Theory of Defense: All internet issued prescriptions were controlled and disseminated through an off-site facility.  Medical doctors could not police their own issued prescriptions.  Someone other than physicians could have issued false prescriptions.


 

This website is designated for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of an attorney/client relationship. Victor D. Martinez, P.A
Contact us

Please fill out the form below and one of our attorneys will contact you.

Quick Contact Form

Our Office
  • Tampa Office
    423 S. Hyde Park Avenue
    Tampa, Florida 33606
    Phone: 813-289-0600
    Fax: 813-251-0505