Notable Cases
Here you will find a sampling of our verdicts and settlements form our cases in the South Florida area. Please note that every case and situation is different and the case results may vary. If you have questions about any type of criminal case, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Case: GREGG S. LERMAN, ET AL. vs RICK SCOTT, GOVERNOR, ET AL.
On June 3, 2016, the Florida Supreme Court agreed with Attorney Leonard Feuer’s arguments and stopped the Governor of Florida from filling a judicial vacancy through his power of appointment. Instead, the Court ruled that the voters get to decide who will be Palm Beach County’s next County Court Judge. Leonard Feuer represented Gregg Lerman in his suit against Governor Rick Scott. Read more
Charge: Civil Racketeering
In a Miami federal court, Leonard Feuer won a Motion for Summary Judgment in a Civil Racketeering case finding the opposing side’s lawsuit baseless and without merit. Feuer represented a small business which was sued by a competitor, after the competitor repeatedly lost bids to Feuer’s client. The case involved nearly 100,000 pages of documents, 100s of witnesses and millions of dollars.
Charge: DUI
A Broward Judge granted Leonard Feuer’s Motion to Suppress the stop of his client in a DUI case. A police officer found his client asleep in his parked car in a residential neighborhood with the car off, but headlights on. The officer admitted she did not act out of concern for the client’s well-being, and opened his car door to roust him from his sleep. The case was dropped. A win for the defense.
Charge: Attempted First Degree Murder w/ a Firearm
A jury in Palm Beach County acquitted client after agreeing with his Attorney, Leonard Feuer, that client acted in self-defense when he shot his attacker twice in the face. Client was originally charged with Attempted First Degree Murder w/ a Firearm. Feuer successfully argued client’s shooting of the unarmed man outside his property was justified under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.
READ MORE…
Charge: Felony Child Neglect: 2015CF002655AXX
The client was arrested for two counts of felony child neglect for allegedly leaving children in car for under 15 minutes. After filing formal Charges, the State agreed to drop all Charges after client sat through online parenting course.
Charge: Possession Cocaine With Intent to Sell (27 grams) 2014CF012716AXX
The client was arrested after police allegedly saw him seated in a car parked next to a closed business, weighing a bag with 27 grams of cocaine. Charge reduced to misdemeanor Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.
Charge: Trafficking in Heroine 2015CF001397AXX
The client was arrested after traffic stop where the police officer found what appeared to be a large amount of a substance in the client’s possession. The client was licensed to deal in pesticides. The substance was field tested and registered a presumptive positive for heroine. Within days of the arrest, and after providing scientific literature on the subject of pesticides, the police crime laboratory tested the substance on an expedited basis and found that it was actually a pesticide, not heroine, despite the positive field test results. The State dropped the Charges immediately.
Charge: Burglary of a Conveyance With a Battery 2014CF011249AXX
The client was an elderly veteran who experienced a medical episode where he believed a girl was trapped in a parked truck. The client then broke into the truck, hoping to free her. Two bystanders saw the event and sought to restrain the client, who then was alleged to have hit them. There was no girl in the truck. The State agreed to drop all Charges after a series of medical evaluations.
Charge: Possession of Cocaine 2013CF011799AXX
The client was arrested after police alleged he was found with cocaine in the wallet he dropped during his flight from the police. After pushing the prosecution to permit an evidence viewing of the contraband, it was found that the cocaine had been destroyed inadvertently. The State dropped the Charges.
Charge: Organized Scheme to Defraud 2013CF012097AXX & 2013CF012097BXX
The clients owned and operated a towing company. The State alleged that they were involved in a scheme to double-bill the individuals requiring towing services as well as the automobile insurance company that each individual towee paid for membership. On the eve of trial, the State agreed to drop the Charges for what amounted to under $300.00 in restitution.
Charge: Trafficking in Marijuana (127lbs.) 2013CF003343AXX
Client was arrested for trafficking in marijuana after the police alleged she attempted to retrieve 5 large packages addressed to her from the U.S. Post Office, each containing around 25 lbs. of marijuana. The case resolved with no conviction and no incarceration to a lesser Charge of Possession of Marijuana With Intent to Sell.
CHARGE: Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor (Case Number 13017257MM10A)
ISSUES: The client was a Marine who served overseas during a time of war. The client’s former spouse, who previously lost custody of their child to the client, found a video the child had taken of the client watching a football game and smoking out of a nondescript pipe. The firm filed a motion to dismiss challenging both the lack of evidence the client was smoking contraband and the fact that none of the allegations led to a conclusion the child was endangered.
OUTCOME: The State dropped the case on the date of the hearing for the Motion to Dismiss.
CHARGE: Trafficking Marijuana, 25lbs. or more (Case Number 2012CF006281DXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 30 Years Imprisonment with 3 Years Minimum Mandatory Sentence
ISSUES: There were Speedy Trial Violation and Miranda issues flowing from the detention of the client by law enforcement officers after allegedly receiving contraband through a national shipping service. The government waited a very long period of time after the detention had ceased to formally charge the client.
OUTCOME: After filing numerous motions challenging the detention of the client as well as the jurisdiction of the charge for violation of the client’s right to a speedy trial, the client received NO CONVICTION and a limited term of probation.
CHARGES: Sexual Battery, Lewd & Lascivious Battery, Lewd & Lascivious Molestation (Case Number 2010CF004044)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: Life Imprisonment
ISSUES: The client had been wrongfully accused by two stepdaughters of sexual molestation. The allegations arose after the girls had been caught cheating at school and were subject to being disciplined. The girls originally denied the client had done anything, then changed their story after being unduly influenced by other adults.
OUTCOME: Acquittal on all charges after a jury trial in St. Lucie County.
CHARGE: Trafficking in Marijuana, 25 lbs or more (Case Number 2013CF003343AXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 30 Years Imprisonment with 3 Years Minimum Mandatory Sentence
ISSUES: There were Speedy Trial Violation and Miranda issues flowing from the detention of the client by law enforcement officers after allegedly receiving contraband through a national shipping service. The government waited a very long period of time after the detention had ceased to formally charge the client.
OUTCOME: After filing numerous motions challenging the detention of the client as well as the jurisdiction of the charge for violation of the client’s right to a speedy trial, the client received NO CONVICTION and a limited term of probation.
CHARGE: DUI (Second Within 5 Years of a Prior Conviction) (Case Number 2012CT031300AXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 9 Months Incarceration
ISSUES: The client was stopped after being pulled over for weaving within his own lane of travel. The officer suspected impairment. The client refused roadside exercises and was arrested. The client refused the breath test after saying he would take the breath test if he could call his lawyer for just a moment.
OUTCOME: Not Guilty After Jury Trial!
CHARGE: Domestic Battery (M-13-17214)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 1 year incarceration
ISSUES: The client was arrested for domestic battery. The client had moments before standing her ground been the subject of physical abuse by the alleged victim. The location where the incident occurred had surveillance video which was disregarded by the police but able to be obtained by the firm.
OUTCOME: The State dropped the charges after viewing the surveillance video and witnessing how the client was actually the victim.
CHARGE: DUI (Case Number 2011CT019986AXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 6 months incarceration
ISSUES: The client was stopped after failing to stop at a stop light. She had not performed well during the roadside exercises and was arrested. She refused the breath test. After reviewing the footage of the stop of her vehicle it was apparent that while she did not stop at the “stop bar” in the road, there was no crosswalk, so by law (Florida Statute 316.075(1)(c)(1)) she only had to stop before the roads of the intersection would actually intersect. The firm filed a motion to suppress all evidence flowing from the unlawful seizure of the client, by virtue of pulling her vehicle over for the officer’s mistake of law.
OUTCOME: After reviewing the motion to suppress, the State conceded to the motion and dropped the charges.
CHARGES: Arson and Burglary of a Dwelling (Juvenile case)
ISSUES: The client was a young teen who had been hanging out with his “friends.” The “friends” decided to go to a vacant house and start a fire. The client parted ways with the “friends” and went to his own house where he relayed what was going on to his family, who in turn called the police. The “friends” who were caught pointed blame at the client, in addition to each other. The State brought charged the client, in complete disregard for the fact that the client tried to save the property by telling a responsible adult. The State offered a plea deal that may have been fair for the charges but was unfair and unjust for someone clearly innocent. The firm set the case for trial.
OUTCOME: As trial drew near, the State dropped the charges.
CHARGES: Loitering & Prowling (Case number 2010MM016908AXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 1 Year in Jail
ISSUES: The Client and his friend, both Haitian, were driving slowly through a higher-end residential neighborhood in Boca Raton. The police stopped their car for a seat-belt violation. The police then questioned them about why they were driving slowly, believing the pair were looking for homes to burglarize. The police did not accept that the Client was looking for property in the area.
OUTCOME: After filing a Motion to Suppress, alleging an unreasonable search and seizure, the State Dropped/Abandoned the Charge.
CHARGES: DUI (Case number 2009CT005505AXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 6 Months In Jail
ISSUES: The Client and his wife had gone out to dinner on Valentine’s Day. The couple had not been out for a very long time and had gone to a restaurant and had drinks with dinner. The couple had hired a babysitter for their young children and had been rushing home to relieve the babysitter when their car was stopped by the police. The police report detailed that the Client had been weaving in and out of traffic lanes at a high rate of speed. The Client submitted to roadside exercises and then refused to give a breath sample.
OUTCOME: Acquitted after a jury trial.
CHARGES: Fleeing & Eluding (Case number 2010CF000063AXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: Five Years Imprisonment
ISSUES: The Client was in a van he used for work in the middle of an intersection. A police cruiser pulled up behind his vehicle with its emergency lights activated. The officer got out of his vehicle and approached the driver’s side window. The Client then proceeded through the intersection, whereupon the officer gave chase at 22 miles per hour. During the course of investigating the case, the video of the “chase” was discovered where the officer could be heard stating that the Client was probably just looking for a place to pull over, not trying to escape. The prosecutor wanted 18 months imprisonment for the alleged offense.
OUTCOME: Upon being forced to try the case, the State Dropped/Abandoned the Charges.
CHARGES: Possession of Cocaine (Case number 08-021213CF10A)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 5 Years Imprisonment
ISSUES: The Client had been walking along the street when a police officer pulled up in his vehicle and asked to speak with the Client. After the Client consented to speaking with him, the officer exited the vehicle and the two began to talk to each other. The officer saw a nondescript bulge in his pants and began to question him about what he was doing in the area so late at night. The officer did not believe the Client and then patted him down. The officer couldn’t identify the bulge in his pocket, so he reached into the pocket and retrieved a cell phone case concealing narcotics and paraphernalia. A Motion to Suppress the evidence obtained by the officer’s unlawful search was filed on the Client’s behalf.
OUTCOME: After the Judge Granted the Motion to Suppress the evidence, The Prosecutor Dropped/Abandoned the Charge.
CHARGES: Possession of Cocaine (Case number 08-021213CF10A)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 5 Years Imprisonment
ISSUES: The Client had been walking along the street when a police officer pulled up in his vehicle and asked to speak with the Client. After the Client consented to speaking with him, the officer exited the vehicle and the two began to talk to each other. The officer saw a nondescript bulge in his pants and began to question him about what he was doing in the area so late at night. The officer did not believe the Client and then patted him down. The officer couldn’t identify the bulge in his pocket, so he reached into the pocket and retrieved a cell phone case concealing narcotics and paraphernalia. A Motion to Suppress the evidence obtained by the officer’s unlawful search was filed on the Client’s behalf.
OUTCOME: After the Judge Granted the Motion to Suppress the evidence, The Prosecutor Dropped/Abandoned the Charge.
CHARGES: Arson (1st degree) (Case number 08-002390CF10A)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: Life
ISSUES: The Client was a doctor enjoying the Superbowl in his condominium while smoking a cigar. Ashes from the cigar ignited the couch and nearly ignited the fully occupied multi-story condominium building. The Client dragged the couch to the balcony and attempted to extinguish the fire. The Client pout out the fire, then inspected the cushion of the couch, turning it over in the process. Witnesses, who were all evacuated and standing at the ground level looking upward, claimed that the Client attempted to reignite the couch after seeing sparks emanating from the cushion where the client was standing.
OUTCOME: On the eve of trial, after converting the State’s expert witness into the defense’s expert witness the State abandoned the Arson charge. The State’s expert ultimately agreed that the cushion’s material, with embers having been exposed to air, could have cause the sparks that caused the second fire.
CHARGES: Kidnapping w/ Firearm & Robbery w/ Firearm (Case number 2009CF012384AXX)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: Life
ISSUES: The Client was alleged to have driven two armed men to meet a drug dealer. After the drug dealer entered the car, the two gunmen were alleged to have entered the vehicle, threatening to shoot the Client and the drug dealer. The Client gave a very lengthy statement to the police, taking several inconsistent positions after the police used coercive interrogation tactics, including promising leniency if she changed her story to their version of events. The State had repeatedly relayed that they wanted the Client to do at least 15 years in prison and would have been pleased if she was sentenced to life.
OUTCOME: Probation with No Convictions.
CHARGES: DUI (TOXICOLOGY CASE) (Case number 5596FXD)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 6 Months In Jail
ISSUES: The Client had just left a restaurant where she had consumed a single drink in the course of a business dinner. On the way home, a police officer stopped her vehicle alleging she had been unable to maintain a single lane of travel. The officer alleged he smelled alcohol and asked her to submit to field sobriety exercises at roadside. The Client performed the exercises once in high heels, and once without them. The officer claimed she did not perform to his standards and arrested her. After being arrested, she gave a breath sample that tested well below his expectation of impairment. Her breath reading .022 / .023 was so low that at trial she was entitled to a jury instruction presuming no impairment by alcohol. The officer asked for a urine test, and the Client again submitted. The urine tested positive for several prescription medications that she had been lawfully taking for years. The State’s expert agreed at deposition that the Client could have built up a tolerance for the medications to the point where it cause no impairment, even when combined with moderate amounts of alcohol. The Prosecutor refused to drop the case. The case was pushed to trial.
OUTCOME: The State Dropped/Abandoned the Charges at trial.
Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor
ISSUES: The client was a Marine who served overseas during a time of war. The client’s former spouse, who previously lost custody of their child to the client, found a video the child had taken of the client watching a football game and smoking out of a nondescript pipe. The firm filed a motion to dismiss challenging both the lack of evidence the client was smoking contraband and the fact that none of the allegations led to a conclusion the child was endangered.
OUTCOME: The State dropped the case on the date of the hearing for the Motion to Dismiss.
Trafficking Marijuana, 25lbs. or more
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 30 Years Imprisonment with 3 Years Minimum Mandatory Sentence
ISSUES: There were Speedy Trial Violation and Miranda issues flowing from the detention of the client by law enforcement officers after allegedly receiving contraband through a national shipping service. The government waited a very long period of time after the detention had ceased to formally charge the client.
OUTCOME: After filing numerous motions challenging the detention of the client as well as the jurisdiction of the charge for violation of the client’s right to a speedy trial, the client received NO CONVICTION and a limited term of probation.
Sexual Battery, Lewd & Lascivious Battery, Lewd & Lascivious Molestation
MAXIMUM PENALTY: Life Imprisonment
ISSUES: The client had been wrongfully accused by two stepdaughters of sexual molestation. The allegations arose after the girls had been caught cheating at school and were subject to being disciplined. The girls originally denied the client had done anything, then changed their story after being unduly influenced by other adults.
OUTCOME: Acquittal on all charges after a jury trial in St. Lucie County.
Trafficking in Marijuana, 25 lbs or more
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 30 Years Imprisonment with 3 Years Minimum Mandatory Sentence
ISSUES: There were Speedy Trial Violation and Miranda issues flowing from the detention of the client by law enforcement officers after allegedly receiving contraband through a national shipping service. The government waited a very long period of time after the detention had ceased to formally charge the client.
OUTCOME: After filing numerous motions challenging the detention of the client as well as the jurisdiction of the charge for violation of the client’s right to a speedy trial, the client received NO CONVICTION and a limited term of probation.
DUI (Second Within 5 Years of a Prior Conviction)
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 9 Months Incarceration
ISSUES: The client was stopped after being pulled over for weaving within his own lane of travel. The officer suspected impairment. The client refused roadside exercises and was arrested. The client refused the breath test after saying he would take the breath test if he could call his lawyer for just a moment.
OUTCOME: Not Guilty After Jury Trial!
Domestic Battery
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 1 year incarceration
ISSUES: The client was arrested for domestic battery. The client had moments before standing her ground been the subject of physical abuse by the alleged victim. The location where the incident occurred had surveillance video which was disregarded by the police but able to be obtained by the firm.
OUTCOME: The State dropped the charges after viewing the surveillance video and witnessing how the client was actually the victim.
DUI
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 6 months incarceration
ISSUES: The client was stopped after failing to stop at a stop light. She had not performed well during the roadside exercises and was arrested. She refused the breath test. After reviewing the footage of the stop of her vehicle it was apparent that while she did not stop at the “stop bar” in the road, there was no crosswalk, so by law (Florida Statute 316.075(1)(c)(1)) she only had to stop before the roads of the intersection would actually intersect. The firm filed a motion to suppress all evidence flowing from the unlawful seizure of the client, by virtue of pulling her vehicle over for the officer’s mistake of law.
OUTCOME: After reviewing the motion to suppress, the State conceded to the motion and dropped the charges.
Arson and Burglary of a Dwelling (Juvenile case)
ISSUES: The client was a young teen who had been hanging out with his “friends.” The “friends” decided to go to a vacant house and start a fire. The client parted ways with the “friends” and went to his own house where he relayed what was going on to his family, who in turn called the police. The “friends” who were caught pointed blame at the client, in addition to each other. The State brought charged the client, in complete disregard for the fact that the client tried to save the property by telling a responsible adult. The State offered a plea deal that may have been fair for the charges but was unfair and unjust for someone clearly innocent. The firm set the case for trial.
OUTCOME: As trial drew near, the State dropped the charges.
Loitering & Prowling Criminal Law Case – 32 case 7
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 1 Year in Jail
ISSUES: The Client and his friend, both Haitian, were driving slowly through a higher-end residential neighborhood in Boca Raton. The police stopped their car for a seat-belt violation. The police then questioned them about why they were driving slowly, believing the pair were looking for homes to burglarize. The police did not accept that the Client was looking for property in the area.
OUTCOME: After filing a Motion to Suppress, alleging an unreasonable search and seizure, the State Dropped/Abandoned the Charge.
DUI Law Case – 22 case 3
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 6 Months In Jail
ISSUES: The Client and his wife had gone out to dinner on Valentine’s Day. The couple had not been out for a very long time and had gone to a restaurant and had drinks with dinner. The couple had hired a babysitter for their young children and had been rushing home to relieve the babysitter when their car was stopped by the police. The police report detailed that the Client had been weaving in and out of traffic lanes at a high rate of speed. The Client submitted to roadside exercises and then refused to give a breath sample.
OUTCOME: Acquitted after a jury trial.
Fleeing & Eluding Criminal Law Case – 31 case 6
ISSUES: The Client was in a van he used for work in the middle of an intersection. A police cruiser pulled up behind his vehicle with its emergency lights activated. The officer got out of his vehicle and approached the driver’s side window. The Client then proceeded through the intersection, whereupon the officer gave chase at 22 miles per hour. During the course of investigating the case, the video of the “chase” was discovered where the officer could be heard stating that the Client was probably just looking for a place to pull over, not trying to escape. The prosecutor wanted 18 months imprisonment for the alleged offense.
OUTCOME: Upon being forced to try the case, the State Dropped/Abandoned the Charges.
Possession of Cocaine Criminal Law Case – 21 case 2
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 5 Years Imprisonment
ISSUES: The Client had been walking along the street when a police officer pulled up in his vehicle and asked to speak with the Client. After the Client consented to speaking with him, the officer exited the vehicle and the two began to talk to each other. The officer saw a nondescript bulge in his pants and began to question him about what he was doing in the area so late at night. The officer did not believe the Client and then patted him down. The officer couldn’t identify the bulge in his pocket, so he reached into the pocket and retrieved a cell phone case concealing narcotics and paraphernalia. A Motion to Suppress the evidence obtained by the officer’s unlawful search was filed on the Client’s behalf.
OUTCOME: After the Judge Granted the Motion to Suppress the evidence, The Prosecutor Dropped/Abandoned the Charge.
Arson (First Degree) Criminal Law Case – 30 case 5
MAXIMUM PENALTY: Life
ISSUES: The Client was a doctor enjoying the Superbowl in his condominium while smoking a cigar. Ashes from the cigar ignited the couch and nearly ignited the fully occupied multi-story condominium building. The Client dragged the couch to the balcony and attempted to extinguish the fire. The Client pout out the fire, then inspected the cushion of the couch, turning it over in the process. Witnesses, who were all evacuated and standing at the ground level looking upward, claimed that the Client attempted to reignite the couch after seeing sparks emanating from the cushion where the client was standing.
OUTCOME: On the eve of trial, after converting the State’s expert witness into the defense’s expert witness the State abandoned the Arson charge. The State’s expert ultimately agreed that the cushion’s material, with embers having been exposed to air, could have cause the sparks that caused the second fire.
Kidnapping with Firearm & Robbery with Firearm Criminal Law Case – 20 case 1
MAXIMUM PENALTY: Life
ISSUES: The Client was alleged to have driven two armed men to meet a drug dealer. After the drug dealer entered the car, the two gunmen were alleged to have entered the vehicle, threatening to shoot the Client and the drug dealer. The Client gave a very lengthy statement to the police, taking several inconsistent positions after the police used coercive interrogation tactics, including promising leniency if she changed her story to their version of events. The State had repeatedly relayed that they wanted the Client to do at least 15 years in prison and would have been pleased if she was sentenced to life.
OUTCOME: Probation with No Convictions.
DUI Toxicology Case – 29 case 4
MAXIMUM PENALTY: 6 Months In Jail
ISSUES: The Client had just left a restaurant where she had consumed a single drink in the course of a business dinner. On the way home, a police officer stopped her vehicle alleging she had been unable to maintain a single lane of travel. The officer alleged he smelled alcohol and asked her to submit to field sobriety exercises at roadside. The Client performed the exercises once in high heels, and once without them. The officer claimed she did not perform to his standards and arrested her. After being arrested, she gave a breath sample that tested well below his expectation of impairment. Her breath reading .022 / .023 was so low that at trial she was entitled to a jury instruction presuming no impairment by alcohol. The officer asked for a urine test, and the Client again submitted. The urine tested positive for several prescription medications that she had been lawfully taking for years. The State’s expert agreed at deposition that the Client could have built up a tolerance for the medications to the point where it cause no impairment, even when combined with moderate amounts of alcohol. The Prosecutor refused to drop the case. The case was pushed to trial.
OUTCOME: The State Dropped/Abandoned the Charges at trial.