“The Megaro Criminal Law Library,” a public service of Criminal Defense Lawyer Patrick Megaro, now updated with recent articles and videos



“The Megaro Criminal Law Library,” a public service of Criminal Defense Lawyer Patrick Megaro, now updated with recent articles and videos

“The Megaro Criminal Law Library” is available online. Recently, the library has been updated with articles and videos, including an instructional series.

“The Megaro Criminal Law Library” is a public service created by criminal defense lawyer Patrick Megaro. Mr. Megaro is a Criminal Defense Attorney with offices in Orlando, Florida. The library contains all of Mr. Megaro’s Criminal Law articles and videos. There is also a “search” feature that allows users to search the videos and articles by keyword. The Library is organized by different sections, Videos, Articles, News and an Archive.

Patrick Megaro is providing all this information as a public service, free of charge. “I have focused on this area of law for more than 20 years, and at this stage in my life and experience, I would like to share with the public, law students, and my peers all the knowledge I have acquired. I sincerely hope that some of my esteemed colleagues in the profession will find the materials useful for their own law practice.” Mr. Megaro explains the idea of the Library. He started out with a Blog with his written articles and commentary, but eventually it became too unwieldy and difficult to search. He therefore decided to organize all of the information more efficiently, and use an index service so that users can search the information by keyword.

The newest addition to the Library is Mr. Megaro’s “instructional series.” In his first article in his instructional series, veteran criminal defense attorney Patrick Michael Megaro comments on Martin v. State, an appellate decision from the Second District Court of Appeal of Florida, dealing with recent changes to Florida’s self-defense laws. Florida legislature’s amendment to section 776.032 marks an important shift in self-defense laws in the state of Florida.  As the Martin court explained “[t]he Florida Legislature's amendment to section 776.032 added the following provision: (4) In a criminal prosecution, once a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity from criminal prosecution has been raised by the defendant at a pretrial immunity hearing, the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence is on the party seeking to overcome the immunity from criminal prosecution provided in subsection (1).”  The Martin court went on to explain that “as it now stands, the State bears the burden of disproving, by clear and convincing evidence, a facially sufficient claim of self-defense immunity in a criminal prosecution.”

This is obviously a very important change in criminal cases involving self-defense claims.  Before the amendment, criminal defendants in Florida who wished to assert self-defense had the burden of proof.  It was the defendant that had to convince the jury that their actions were justified due to self-defense.  After the amendment, the defendant only has to present a facially sufficient claim of self-defense, a very low bar.  The burden of proof now rests on the prosecution to show that there was no justification for self-defense, and the burden is by clear and convincing evidence, one step below beyond reasonable doubt, but still a very significant hurdle.
The Court went on to address whether the amendment applies only to cases going forward or retroactively to all existing criminal cases.  “Statutory amendments may take one of three forms: substantive, which are usually applied prospectively, or procedural or remedial, either of which may apply retroactively to pending proceedings”, the Martin court explained.  The court discussed that “[i]n the context of criminal cases specifically, ‘substantive law is that which declares what acts are crimes and prescribes the punishment therefor, while procedural law is that which provides or regulates the steps by which one who violates a criminal statute is punished.’” 
Finally, the court noted that “[i]n Florida, statutory changes to the burden of proof—the change at issue here—are invariably deemed procedural in nature for purposes of retroactive application.”  Therefore, “[s]ubsection (4) now ascribes to the State what had, under common law precedent, been the defendant's burden of proof. That is not a substantive change. Neither the substantive rights of a successful claim of immunity nor the necessary elements of proof to establish a claim of immunity were altered by the June 9, 2017, amendment.”  Thus, the amended standard of proof in self-defense cases applies not only to future cases, but also to existing cases and even those cases under appeal.  The case is Martin v. State, Case No. 2D16-4468, (Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 2nd District, May 4, 2018).

The article will be published in full in The Megaro Criminal Law Library at  https://themegarocriminallawlibrary.com/ and on the Blog of Mr. Megaro, https://patrickmegaroblog.blogspot.com/


**** Patrick Michael Megaro is a partner at Halscott Megaro PA. His primary areas of practice are criminal defense, criminal appeals, post-conviction relief, civil appeals, and civil rights litigation. See https://themegarocriminallawlibrary.com/ - Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/patrickmichael.megaro.9 - Attorney Profile: https://criminal-defense-attorney.squarespace.com/patrick-michael-megaro-esq/ - Attorney Profile at: https://solomonlawguild.com/patrick-michael-megaro; Attorney News at: https://attorneygazette.com/patrick-megaro%2C-esq#ab17a387-a757-4c0f-bc37-81f556fd15ea

Patrick Megaro, Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney publishes his first article in his series of Instructional Articles, the first one on recent changes to Florida’s self-defense laws



Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney publishes his first article in his series of Instructional Articles, the first one on recent changes to Florida’s self-defense laws
            In his first article in his instructional series, veteran criminal defense attorney Patrick Michael Megaro comments on Martin v. State, an appellate decision from the Second District Court of Appeal of Florida, dealing with recent changes to Florida’s self defense laws.

            Florida legislature’s amendment to section 776.032 marks an important shift in self defense laws in the state of Florida.  As the Martin court explained “[t]he Florida Legislature's amendment to section 776.032 added the following provision: (4) In a criminal prosecution, once a prima facie claim of self defense immunity from criminal prosecution has been raised by the defendant at a pretrial immunity hearing, the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence is on the party seeking to overcome the immunity from criminal prosecution provided in subsection (1).”  The Martin court went on to explain that “as it now stands, the State bears the burden of disproving, by clear and convincing evidence, a facially sufficient claim of self-defense immunity in a criminal prosecution.”

            This is obviously a very important change in criminal cases involving self defense claims.  Before the amendment, criminal defendants in Florida who wished to assert self defense had the burden of proof.  It was the defendant that had to convince the jury that their actions were justified due to self defense.  After the amendment, the defendant only has to present a facially sufficient claim of self defense, a very low bar.  The burden of proof now rests on the prosecution to show that there was no justification for self defense, and the burden is by clear and convincing evidence, one step below beyond reasonable doubt, but still a very significant hurdle.

            Martin case went on to address whether the amendment applies only to cases going forward or retroactively to all existing criminal cases.  “Statutory amendments may take one of three forms: substantive, which are usually applied prospectively, or procedural or remedial, either of which may apply retroactively to pending proceedings”, the Martin court explained.  The court discussed that “[i]n the context of criminal cases specifically, ‘substantive law is that which declares what acts are crimes and prescribes the punishment therefor, while procedural law is that which provides or regulates the steps by which one who violates a criminal statute is punished.’”  

The Martin court noted that “[i]n Florida, statutory changes to the burden of proof—the change at issue here—are invariably deemed procedural in nature for purposes of retroactive application.”  Therefore, “[s]ubsection (4) now ascribes to the State what had, under common law precedent, been the defendant's burden of proof. That is not a substantive change. Neither the substantive rights of a successful claim of immunity nor the necessary elements of proof to establish a claim of immunity were altered by the June 9, 2017, amendment.”  Thus, the amended standard of proof in self defense cases applies not only to future cases, but also to existing cases and even those cases under appeal.  The case is Martin v. State, Case No. 2D16-4468, (Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 2nd District, May 4, 2018), available at https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5709431534236501779&q=martin+v+state+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&as_ylo=2017.

The article will be published in full on the Blog of Mr. Megaro, https://patrickmegaroblog.blogspot.com/

It will also be published in The Megaro Criminal Law Library at https://themegarocriminallawlibrary.com/


**** Patrick Michael Megaro is a partner at Halscott Megaro PA. His primary areas of practice are criminal defense, criminal appeals, post-conviction relief, civil appeals, and civil rights litigation. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/patrickmichael.megaro.9 - Attorney Profile: https://criminal-defense-attorney.squarespace.com/patrick-michael-megaro-esq/ - Attorney Profile at: https://solomonlawguild.com/patrick-michael-megaro; Attorney News at: https://attorneygazette.com/patrick-megaro%2C-esq#ab17a387-a757-4c0f-bc37-81f556fd15ea

As a public service, Criminal Lawyer Patrick Megaro sets up “The Megaro Criminal Law Library” with all his articles and videos


As a public service, Criminal Lawyer Patrick Megaro sets up “The Megaro Criminal Law Library” with all his articles and videos

Patrick Megaro, a respected Criminal Lawyer based in Orlando, Florida, announced today that “The Megaro Criminal Law Library” is now available online. The library is a public service and contains all of Mr. Megaro’s Criminal law articles and videos. In addition, there is a “search” feature that allows users to search the videos and articles by keyword.

Mr. Megaro explains that he started out with a Blog with his written articles and commentary, but eventually, “with the growth of the content, it became too unwieldy and difficult to search. I thus decided to organize all of the information more efficiently, and use an index service so that users can search the Library by keyword.”

Mr. Megaro is providing all this information as a public service, free of charge. “I have focused on this area of law for more than 20 years, and at this stage in my life and experience, I would like to share with the public, law students, and my peers all the knowledge I have acquired. I sincerely hope that some of my esteemed colleagues in the profession will find the materials useful for their own law practice.”

The Library is organized by different sections, Videos, Articles, News and an Archive. The most recent featured article of Mr. Megaro is about “How to Preserve Error At Trial in Florida: An Appellate Lawyer’s Practice Tips (PART 1).” In that article, Mr. Megaro addresses the problem when an error at trial is not properly preserved for appeal. In legalese, that is something like “This issue before us was not properly preserved for appellate review and is therefore not now cognizable.  Affirmed.”  Mr. Megaro explains that “appellate lawyers cringe when we see these words written, especially in our own case decisions.  This means that no matter how brilliant the trial attorney was, they did not make a specific, timely objection at the trial level, which has effectively waived their client’s right to appeal that issue.” The law requires that any error during trial be properly preserved. Thus, a lawyer must be specific with the objection so as to inform the trial court of the perceived error.”  State v. Garza, 118 So.3d 856 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013). It means that the attorney must spell out WHY he or she objects (be it in a motion, a post-hearing memorandum of law, a written notice of objection, or an argument on the record at the appropriate time why something is legally erroneous). Further, such objection must be SPECIFIC. Finally, the objection must be TIMELY and CONTEMPORANEOUS.  This means that the attorney must immediately object when something is coming into evidence – sometimes before and after.

The Megaro Criminal Law Library is available to the public, free of charge, https://TheMegaroCriminalLawLibrary.com

About Patrick Megaro


Patrick Michael Megaro is an attorney at Halscott Megaro PA. His primary areas of practice are criminal defense, criminal appeals, post-conviction relief, civil appeals, and civil rights litigation.


The Megaro Criminal Law Library: https://themegarocriminallawlibrary.com/






**** Patrick Michael Megaro is a partner at Halscott Megaro PA. His primary areas of practice are criminal defense, criminal appeals, post-conviction relief, civil appeals, and civil rights litigation. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/patrickmichael.megaro.9 - Attorney Profile: https://criminal-defense-attorney.squarespace.com/patrick-michael-megaro-esq/ - Attorney Profile at: https://solomonlawguild.com/patrick-michael-megaro; Attorney News at: https://attorneygazette.com/patrick-megaro%2C-esq#ab17a387-a757-4c0f-bc37-81f556fd15ea

Patrick Megaro: The Orange County Register publishes analytical Expose about Corvain Cooper who has been sentenced to life for non-violent marijuana offenses




Orange County, California (September 2018) – On September 10, 2018, The Orange County Register published a detailed analysis of the case of Corvain Cooper, whose only hope to ever get released from prison is a clemency grant by President Trump or a review by the U.S. Supreme Court. While such dire prospects would indicate that the most violent crimes are involved, Cooper’s offenses are non-violent marijuana offenses. But he had two prior offenses, which resulted in the application of the “three strikes law.”
The Orange County Register article was researched and written by journalist Brooke Edwards Staggs, who is a general assignment reporter with a focus on covering the politics, business, health and culture of cannabis. For this article, Staggs interviewed the mother of Corvain Cooper, other family members, and Cooper’s attorney, Orlando-based Criminal Defense Lawyer Patrick Megaro. Patrick Megaro has represented Cooper pro bono since 2014. Megaro has ceaselessly pursued justice for Cooper, but now it is down to two options – President Trump or the U.S. Supreme Court.
The article quotes Megaro: “I’m just hoping that somebody, somewhere — whether that’s in the White House or across the street at the Supreme Court — sees that this particular sentence is complete madness.”

The article then summarizes the appeals that Patrick Megaro has initiated on Cooper’s behalf:

“Megaro appealed Cooper’s case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but in 2016 the justices declined to hear it. Still, two decisions made by California voters while Cooper has been in prison serve to give Megaro and Cooper hope. First, in 2014, voters approved Proposition 47, reducing many drug crimes to misdemeanors. Under that new law, Cooper’s conviction for possession of cough syrup with codeine was downgraded from a felony to a misdemeanor. Then, in November 2016, voters approved Proposition 64. In addition to legalizing the recreational use of cannabis, the measure reduced or eliminated nearly every marijuana-related crime. And in May 2017, Cooper’s felony marijuana charge from 2009 was reduced to a misdemeanor. Earlier this year, Megaro went back to federal appeals court in North Carolina and explained that Cooper’s two prior felonies were no longer strikes. But they refused to reconsider his sentence. In July, Megaro filed a new petition with the Supreme Court. And, last month, they got one bit of potentially encouraging news, when Solicitor General Noel Francisco requested more time to submit the government’s response to Cooper’s petition. As they wait to hear back from the Supreme Court, Megaro is also appealing Cooper’s case to the White House — for the second time.”

It all began when Corvain Cooper was charged in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina with conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana, and conspiracy to commit money laundering and structuring transactions. A special information was also filed against Cooper, alleging two prior felony convictions for possession of drugs (one for marijuana, one for codeine cough syrup) in the California state courts. The filing triggered a mandatory life sentence without parole.  The reason for the unusually harsh sentence is the so-called “Three Strikes” law.  These laws require a person guilty of committing a drug felony and two other previous drug felony convictions to serve a mandatory life sentence in prison.  The “Three Strikes” law significantly increases the prison sentences of persons convicted of a felony who have been previously convicted of two or more violent crimes or drug felonies, and limits the ability of these offenders to receive a punishment other than a life sentence.

 


Background

The underlying court cases are United States v. Cooper, 624 Fed.Appx. 819 (4th Cir. 2015), and United States v. Cooper, 714 Fed.Appx. 259 (4th Cir. 2018). According to a press release of the U.S. Attorney’s Office, “from in or about 2004 through January 2013, Cooper was involved in a drug conspiracy that trafficked marijuana from California to the Charlotte area. Court records show that Cooper was charged with conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute at least one thousand kilograms of marijuana as well as money laundering conspiracy and structuring financial transactions through banking institutions to avoid IRS reporting requirements. Cooper, along with two co-defendants, Evelyn LaChapelle and Natalia Wade, were convicted of all charges on October 18, 2013, following a three-day trial.” He was sentenced to life in prison on June 18, 2014. See https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdnc/pr/california-drug-trafficker-sentenced-life-prison-drug-conspiracy-and-related-charges


A Wikipedia article on Three-Strikes Law is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-strikes_law

 

A online petition urging the President to grant Corvain Cooper clemency and release him from prison is at https://www.change.org/p/donald-trump-release-corvain-cooper-from-life-imprisonment-without-parole-for-marijuana

 


About Patrick Megaro

Patrick Michael Megaro is an attorney at Halscott Megaro PA. His primary areas of practice are criminal defense, criminal appeals, post-conviction relief, civil appeals, and civil rights litigation.


The Megaro Criminal Law Library: https://themegarocriminallawlibrary.com/






**** Patrick Michael Megaro is a partner at Halscott Megaro PA. His primary areas of practice are criminal defense, criminal appeals, post-conviction relief, civil appeals, and civil rights litigation. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/patrickmichael.megaro.9 - Attorney Profile: https://criminal-defense-attorney.squarespace.com/patrick-michael-megaro-esq/ - Attorney Profile at: https://solomonlawguild.com/patrick-michael-megaro; Attorney News at: https://attorneygazette.com/patrick-megaro%2C-esq#ab17a387-a757-4c0f-bc37-81f556fd15ea

Patrick Megaro, More than 70,000 people have signed Petition asking for the release of Corvain Cooper, sentenced to life for marijuana offenses

More than 70,000 people have signed Petition asking for the release of Corvain Cooper, sentenced to life for marijuana offenses Pe...