|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Congratulations to ASA Vianca Picart and Assistant Chief Kioceaia Stenson for securing a guilty verdict before Judge David Young on one count of Armed Robbery with a Firearm as a principal. |
| The Victim spent the evening in Wynwood before heading home in the early morning hours of May 27, 2023. He did not realize that he was being followed by a white Dodge Challenger. When he parked in his parking garage, an unknown Co-Defendant approached the driver’s side of the Victim’s vehicle and took his belongings at gunpoint. The Dodge Challenger and its registered owner were located later that day in Broward County. The owner of the vehicle informed law enforcement that he had rented the Challenger to someone by the name of “Brandon” the day before and provided a phone number. |
| With the owner’s assistance, the detectives discovered that the Challenger pinged at a RaceTrac gas station 2.5 hours after the robbery. The Lead Detective went to the gas station and recorded surveillance camera footage on his phone that showed the Challenger arriving at the gas station and the Defendant exiting from the driver’s side. Detectives also obtained a warrant for the Defendant’s cell-site data and his call records |
| This case was particularly challenging because it was circumstantial. The Victim could not identify the Defendant because he never left the vehicle during the robbery and could not be seen. Although the gunman was visible numerous times during the robbery on the parking garage surveillance video, the Defendant could not be seen. |
| The State secured a cell site expert to assist in establishing the movements of the Defendant with his phone. The Defendant was shown to be in the general area of the crime during the night before and morning hours of the 27th. It showed that he turned off his phone an hour before the robbery and back on while driving North on I-95 just 10 minutes after the robbery. Additionally, the cell-site records showed the Defendant’s phone was in the area of the gas station on the morning of May 27th and the registered owner’s address. Although the owner of the Challenger was uncooperative until the morning he testified, his last-minute decision to tell the jury the truth about what he knew was instrumental in securing this guilty verdict. |
| The prosecutors would like to thank Assistant State Attorney Khalil Quinan, Victim Witness Specialist Gabriela Queral, Lead Worker and Victim Witness Counselor Kyra Pajares-Marimon, Secretary Barbara Potts, Interns Victoria Baez and Nia Virgo and our wonderful Litigation Support Unit. |
| Congratulations to Sexual Battery Unit ASAs Marie Koth and Lily Wisset for securing a guilty verdict of Lewd or Lascivious Conduct on a Child Under 16 before Judge Hirsch. |
| The Victim’s mother began a downward spiral after her divorce from the Victim’s father – she entered into a romantic relationship with her married cousin, the Defendant, and began drinking heavily and neglecting her children. The Victim and her three young brothers lived at their mother’s home in chaos, which was exacerbated by the Defendant’s regular presence. The Defendant took advantage of the situation and preyed upon the Victim. The Victim was able to recall two specific incidents in detail. |
| On one occasion, the Defendant entered the Victim’s bedroom while she was helping her younger siblings with their homework. He told her that her mother was calling her, took her by the hand, led her to her mother’s room, and shut the door. The Victim was then instructed to sit in a chair between her mother and the Defendant who both appeared to be intoxicated. The Defendant began touching the Victim inappropriately. The Victim attempted to exit the room but the Defendant grabbed her by the arm and started to pull her onto his lap. Eventually, the Victim was able to break free and run back to her brothers. |
| Soon after the first incident, the Defendant came to the Victim’s bedroom again. This time it was the middle of the night and he was completely naked. He grabbed the Victim’s arm, pulled her into the hallway, and cornered her against the wall. He asked her to kiss him but she refused. He proceeded to inappropriately touch her while attempting to kiss her. Fortunately, a nearby item fell with a loud crash that scared the Defendant off. The Victim then ran back to her room. |
| Throughout the time of her abuse and neglect, the Victim would go to her father’s house on weekends. Eventually, when she was around 11, she refused to go back to her mother’s home. Two years later, the Victim disclosed to her stepmother and father that the Defendant had touched her inappropriately years prior. They immediately went to the police. Both the Defendant and the Victim’s mother were arrested. |
| At trial, the case hinged almost entirely upon the now-16-year-old Victim’s testimony. The defense attempted to establish various motives for the Victim to lie including an unsubstantiated “custody battle.” However, the Victim was compelling and moved the jury with her sincerity and trauma. Her family members testified about her initial disclosure as well as background information which refuted the defense arguments. |
| The ASAs would like to thank SBU Division Chief Natalie Snyder for her invaluable advice and Victim/Witness Coordinator Smirne Syndic for coordinating the witnesses and supporting the victim and family. Another special thank you to SBU secretaries Charlotte Haslem and Valerie Ford for assisting with trial preparations. |
