Dear Friend,
Since 1987, March has been designated as National Women’s History Month. During these 31 days, we celebrate and recognize the rich, diverse, and intricate role women have played in shaping the fabric of our country. By highlighting the contribution of women from all backgrounds, we can better understand our history and explore their legacy.
Though the contribution of women has been great, we may not know all the ways that they have been instrumental in advancements that have impacted our everyday lives. When we recognize the achievements of women in literature, art, medicine, sports, science, government, and in the community, it tells our young girls and women that they are valuable, worthy, and can reach any goal that they see possible for themselves and their future.
I remember as a young girl going with my father, Dr Carlos Benito Fernandez, to court as he represented clients. He made it a point to take me to the courtrooms of the only two female judges on the bench at that time. He wanted me to see that I could do and achieve my dreams and that my gender was not an impediment to that no matter what others may believe. The important thing was to be prepared and believe in myself.
When I began my career as a prosecutor, I was one of only a handful of women lawyers at the State Attorney’s Office. Now, when you look at our office, you can see women in all types of leadership roles and in other areas of the criminal justice system.
I urge you to discover the stories of the women in your families and your lives because every woman has a story. I also encourage you to find out more about the contribution that women have made to our country by visiting the website for the National Women’s History Museum at www.womenshistory.org.
Thank you and God Bless,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| After 35 years as a prosecutor, John Perikles is retiring from the State Attorney’s Office. Though being an Assistant State Attorney was not something he grew up thinking he would dedicate his entire legal career to, this grandson of Greek immigrants has become one of the most respected lawyers in our community. |
| John was born in Silver Spring, Maryland, and raised in Rockville, a town just 5 miles away. He has an older brother who works in IT. His mother is from Delaware and his father is from Cleveland. Both pairs of grandparents emigrated from Greece. John’s maternal grandfather owned a restaurant, like many other Greek immigrants, in Washington D.C. |
| His dad was in the United States Air Force and then became a pilot for Eastern Airlines. He also had his own crop-dusting business. John dreamed of being in the Air Force like his dad. “As I got older my mother dissuaded me and I went on to study Political Science at George Washington University in D.C.,” explains John. “I had thought about going into politics but later, I decided it wasn’t for me. So, I went to law school at Georgetown University. My mother worked and her entire salary went to pay for my law school. |
| The summer after his second year of law school, John interned in the Judge Advocate General's Corps (JAG Corps) in Germany. “It was an amazing and enriching experience.” |
| While in law school John interviewed with the SAO. Why was he interested in coming to Miami? “Well, first there was the TV series ‘Miami Vice’ and Miami was a dynamic and exciting city. I had also heard that at SAO you get trial experience. Others I had spoken to, had told me that in L.A. and New York, it would be 2-3 years before you get a felony trial." |
| John remembers his second interview with now-State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle at the Florida House and recalls that “it was quite impressive.” |
| “My third interview was with then State Attorney Janet Reno and that was intimidating. She was over 6 feet tall and then she was throwing hypotheticals at me before I sat down in my chair. I was told that the third interview was going to be a walk in the park, but I felt like I was at the bottom of a pool.” |
| He began at SAO in August of 1989. “When I started it was a bit intimidating because many in my class had more direct experience. They had either interned at the SAO or at other prosecutors’ offices.” |
| After completing his time in County Court, John was promoted to a C in the Felony Division. “I was assigned to Judge Ellen Morphonios which was a very trial-active courtroom. I had never had a felony trial, so I had to learn and survive. I remember that in one week we picked three juries which is not common in most courtrooms.” “I remember having over 300 cases set for trial in one week. We were carrying 5-6 boxes of case files. My caseload was almost 400 as a C Prosecutor." |
| A case that has stayed with John even after all these years is the State v. Joseph Mackey. The Defendant was a roofer and the boyfriend of the mother of the 2-year-old girl he killed. “I remember her angelic face. It was my first death penalty case. Mackey was taking care of her while the mother was at work. He pounded the child’s head into AstroTurf. It was an incredibly emotional case. Mackey got a life sentence.” |
| John was assigned to the Narcotics Unit after being an A prosecutor. “It was very exciting and active during that time.” |
| “I had a case with a huge heroin drug ring that involved 7- 8 Defendants. All were charged. Police had tons of evidence against all of them except for one. His defense lawyer didn’t believe his client when he said he was not guilty. The defense attorney never asserted his client’s innocence, he only tried to get a better prison plea offer. He basically let his client sit in jail for a year. The defendant could barely speak as a result of a gunshot wound to his throat. Then he got a new lawyer who actually listened to him and came to me saying that we got the wrong guy. He asked me to listen to the undercover voice recording of the real culprit. We did some work and realized that the police had arrested the wrong person. The actual culprit, who had the same general appearance and nickname as the man sitting in jail, was killed soon after the drug deal incident in a police shooting. It took both attorneys to solve this and do the right thing.” |
| In 1995, John became a Felony Division Chief. A few years later he received a request from SA Fernandez Rundle to be a part of Special Prosecutions. “In 1998 I joined the Public Corruption Unit. Two years later I went to the Organized Crime Unit where I worked for 10 years.” |
| “I first worked directly with the State Attorney during my time in public corruption. At first, it was intimidating, but I learned that she let me speak freely and she is accepting of ideas. Over the years we established a great working relationship. I believe she trusts my judgment.” |
| “John’s often low-key manner when first approaching a problem belies his thoughtful churning of ideas while developing the best resolution at hand, “said State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle. “In every instance, I can recall, I have never seen John waiver in the face of difficulty or complexity. His quick ability to grasp the core issues of a situation and simplify what best needs to be done have made him not just an excellent prosecutor but a superb advisor and friend.” |
| Then in 2013, the State Attorney asked John to be her designated Executive Director of the South Florida Money Laundering Strike Force. “It is a multijurisdictional South Florida HIDTA (High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas) initiative that targets local, national, and transnational money launderers. I did that for five years.” |
| Because of his ability to excel and thrive in the areas to which he had been assigned, John was asked to lead the Economic Crimes Unit (ECU) in 2016. “Economic Crimes was never on my radar and is very different from the other types of crimes we deal with as prosecutors. These are among the most difficult cases to put together because ECU overlaps with things that are civil. You must be familiar with mortgages, finance, lending, probate, etc.… Something that looks civil could be criminal and vice versa.” |
| John has worked closely with State Attorney Fernandez Rundle on presenting several important matters to the Grand Jury. “In the fall of 2017, I called witnesses to testify before them regarding the issues facing condominium owners. As can be seen in their report, the members of the Grand Jury were shocked by DBPR (Department of Business & Professional Regulation) and the lack of protections for property owners. They gave specific suggestions as to what laws needed to be enacted.” |
| “For years I have worked with the State Attorney to pass legislation with more teeth, more clarity, and consequences that will protect homeowners.” |
| John explains that ECU cases, especially those having to do with condos and HOAs, are difficult because of the stacks of documents and administrative papers that need to be reviewed. “It can take weeks or even months to go through the paperwork to determine if a crime was committed. And that is if they obey the subpoenas and turn over records. In the Hammocks case took us years of litigation to get the records. And then we had to review them all.” |
| In addition to going to townhalls, community meetings, workshops, and conferences, “ John even went to Tallahassee and testified before House and Senate committees. |
| Various new laws that address condominium and homeowner associations include much of the language that was written by John. |
| When he reflects back on 35 years of being a prosecutor, John looks back with appreciation and satisfaction that he was able to serve our community. “This job can be very rewarding because you get to do the right thing. The most important thing for someone who wants to be a prosecutor is to be truly motivated to do this job.” |
| “The greatest thing about working here is the people. Friends that I have met here are still my friends. We created strong bonds, socialized outside the office and that comradery carried us through. We had fun doing our job.” |
| Besides gaining a wealth of legal experience and friends, John met his wife Marie at the SAO and fell in love. “I was about five years in, and she had started a few years after me. After being married, I remember having lunch one day while we went over gruesome homicide pictures. It’s odd for most people but that is what we did many times." |
| Now that John is retiring, he will be able to enjoy relaxing lunches, travel, work on his boat, and get to that Honey-do list that Marie has for him. |
| John Perikles thank you for your decades of service and for fulfilling our mission of keeping our community safe. |
|
| Congratulations to ASAs Ashley Moussa Martinez and Stephanie Cruz, who secured a guilty verdict against Defendant Judah Gangaram for one count of Attempted Second-Degree Murder with a Deadly Weapon Causing Aggravated Battery and one count of Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by a Minor. |
| The Victim and the 17-year-old Defendant had been friends in the neighborhood and at school for a few years. At the end of May 2017, the Defendant told the Victim that another kid from the neighborhood had given him a 9mm Glock to hold temporarily. The Defendant told the Victim that he wanted to keep the gun rather than give it back. The Victim and the Defendant came up with a plan to say that the Defendant was robbed, and the gun was taken from him. |
| Later, the Defendant’s cousin and a close friend of the kid from the neighborhood, who was known as “Smoke One,” found the Victim on the street and confronted him about the location of the gun. After being intimidated by Smoke One, the Victim admitted that he and the Defendant had lied, and the Defendant still had the gun. A couple of days later, Smoke One found the Victim riding his bike in the neighborhood again and asked him about the gun. Still, in fear of Smoke One, the Victim told the truth about the Defendant a second time. |
| On the night of May 30, 2017, the Victim was out riding his bike with another friend near NW 58th Street and NW 8th Avenue. While his friend rode ahead, the Victim saw the Defendant pull up in a red car with Smoke One and another young man. The Victim saw the Defendant get out of one of the passenger seats and walk up to greet him. Not knowing the price he was about to pay for telling the truth, the Victim turned his back to the Defendant, who immediately began shooting him from behind. The Defendant shot the Victim nine times, striking him in the back, face, arm, and leg. While lying stomach-down on the sidewalk with his face turned toward the street, bleeding and paralyzed from the shooting, the Victim was able to see the Defendant get back into the same red car and drive away. |
| There was no video footage depicting the crime, no other eyewitness to the shooting, and no DNA or fingerprints in this case. Of course, the Victim never saw the Defendant holding the gun or pulling the trigger when he was shot repeatedly from behind. No firearm was ever recovered, but the State presented evidence that eleven spent casings found on scene around where the Victim was found paralyzed were all fired from the same 9mm Glock. |
| The defense focused on the fact that other people had a motive to shoot the Victim. Testimony came out at trial that two months before the shooting, the Victim got into a fight with an older kid from the neighborhood, who was disrespecting and bullying the Victim. The Victim threw the first punch but lost the fight. Additionally, the Victim was impeached with multiple, prior inconsistent statements he had made. The defense argued that the Victim’s testimony could not be trusted and that any of the other people involved had a motive to shoot the Victim, whereas his friend, the Defendant, did not. Ultimately, the jurors found the Defendant was proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| The ASAs would like to thank Secretary Jonathan Alfonso, Victim/Witness Specialists Lauren Jimenez, Claudia Hodgson, and Charles Noguera, and the Litigation Support Team for their assistance preparing for trial and during the trial. They would also like to thank DC Maritza Clop Liriano for assistance with jury selection. Finally, they would like to thank Chief Assistant Kathleen Hoague and everyone else who responded to the e-mail “Motion in Limine re: Wheelchair-Bound Victim.” |
| Congratulations to ASAs Nicholas Rubio and Janeen Zamora for securing a guilty verdict against Defendant Ladarius Crawford for one count of Possession of a Firearm by a Violent Career Criminal in a trial. |
| On July 11, 2023, Robbery Intervention Detail (RID) officers pulled over gray Nissan Altima that was traveling southbound on NW 27th Ave near the intersection with NW 46th St. for having a license tag that was not assigned to it. The Defendant was a passenger in that Altima. As the car was stopping, the Defendant fled from the vehicle on foot and multiple officers gave chase. Detective Melendres pursued and observed the Defendant pull a firearm from his waistband and throw it into a local business’s patio. Detective Melendres stopped chasing the Defendant and went to where the gun was tossed. The Defendant was arrested by other officers. |
| In addition to proving that the Defendant had possessed the firearm, the ASAs had to deal with the Defendant’s prior record in a separate phase of the trial so that the Defendant was not unfairly prejudiced. The defense argued that Det. Melendres was either mistaken or lying about the firearm since the officer’s body worn camera did not show the Defendant actually tossing the gun. They also stressed that the State did not have the Defendant’s DNA or fingerprint on the firearm. To counter this, the ASAs showed the body worn camera footage of Det. Rodriguez. This video showed the flight of the Defendant, Det. Melendres abandoning his pursuit of the Defendant to go after the gun, and him pointing out the location of the firearm to Det. Russell just as he was entering the patio. Additionally, the State called a witness from the crime lab to explain to the jurors the absence of fingerprint evidence on the firearm enclosed in a cloth holster. The jury found the Defendant guilty as charged. He faces up to life in prison because of his prior convictions. |
| The ASAs would like to thank Career Criminal/ Robbery Unit (CCR) Assistant Chief Kioceaia Stenson for her advice and very in-depth knowledge that helped them to resolve the legal issues in this case. They would also like to thank Felon Division Chief Shawn Abuhoff for his advice on trial strategy and CCR Chief Patricia Mulholland for her support and assistance. Finally, they would like to thank the Litigation Support team, Courtney Everett, Judith Richards-Johnson, and Matthew Schultz for all the logistical support. |
| Congratulations to Felony Division Chief Maritza Clop Liriano and Sexual Battery Unit Chief Natalie Snyder for securing a guilty verdict against Defendant Julio Pedrera for two counts of Sexual Battery by Threats, one count of Kidnapping, and one count of Tampering with a Witness. |
| On the night of March 16-17, 2023, the Victim was sharing an Airbnb in Downtown Miami with a friend. When she returned to the Airbnb after having dinner, she saw that her friend had company. Since she did not feel like socializing, she decided to go walk on Miami Beach. |
| As she was walking on the Boardwalk at 15th St. in the early morning hours, she noticed two men following her. She felt uncomfortable because they were getting closer to her. The Victim looked ahead and saw a lady feeding some cats, and she stopped to let the two men pass by her. Since the men passed her and continued walking, she thought she was safe. |
| The Victim kept walking North on the Boardwalk. As she passed 25th St., she saw one of the same men hiding in a dark spot at the entrance to the beach. Suddenly, she felt someone behind her. When she turned around, a man grabbed her and dragged her to the beach. The man was speaking Spanish to her, and the only words she understood were sex, make babies, and kill. As the man dragged her to the beach, she took out her phone and dialed 911, but the call ended somehow. Although the 911 operator tried calling back, the Victim could not answer. |
| In a dark spot on the beach, the Defendant sexually assaulted the Victim. The Victim stated that the Defendant penetrated her for a short time. During the rape, she managed to dial 911 a second time. She could be heard on this 911 call asking for help. When the Defendant heard her asking for help, he took her phone, threw it away from her, and began to strangle her. After the rape, she ran from the beach toward Collins Avenue as fast as she could and called 911 for a third time. |
| The City of Miami Beach has cameras throughout the city, but the Boardwalk only has cameras until 24th St. However, the lead detective followed the movements of the Victim and the two men on the camera videos. He saw that one of the men walked away from the boardwalk toward Collins Avenue on 24th St. At the same time, the second man continued walking north before the Victim walked north past 24th St. too. The next time the second man was seen was approximately 20 minutes later when he ran away from the Boardwalk. The detective noticed that the man running away from the scene was wearing a distinctive Marvel superhero shirt, so he used the camera videos to track him back to a restaurant where he had eaten with two friends before the rape. The detective was able to obtain a credit card receipt for one of the friends and identify him. Next, the detective examined that friend’s social media and found that he was Facebook friends with the Defendant. He also found that the Defendant had posted a picture of himself wearing the same Marvel shirt to his Instagram account earlier that day. |
| This case was challenging because the City of Miami Beach had an issue with the camera system server, and all the camera video the detective viewed was lost. All that remained were screenshots that the detective saved while he reviewed the videos. Additionally, the Victim was unable to identify him from a photographic lineup or provide an accurate description of the Defendant. However, the Defendant’s DNA was found on the Victim’s underwear. |
| The detective collected the Victim's clothing and requested that the MVAC technology be used to collect DNA from her underwear because the Victim had already washed her clothing. The MVAC is a sterile, wet vacuum used to collect DNA. The collection solution is sprayed onto the surface while simultaneously being vacuumed off of it. The MVAC creates a "mini-hurricane" that loosens the DNA material from the fibers of the fabric. The solution is then transferred to the collection bottle and later concentrated onto a filter. The filter is then tested for DNA. In this case, the MVAC was able to extract a significant amount of the Defendant's DNA from the Victim's underwear – 4 times more of his DNA than hers! |
| The defense focused on the amount of DNA recovered from the Victim's underwear after it was washed. According to the defense's expert, based on the fact that the underwear had been washed, it was impossible to recover that much DNA from her underwear. The State called an MVAC expert from the Broward County Sheriff's Office to testify during a Daubert (scientific evidence) pre-trial hearing and again at trial. He testified to the results of his MVAC validation study, pointing to the fact that the MVAC can collect 11,000 percent more DNA than swabbing. The prosecutors successfully excluded the defense's DNA expert, who was unfamiliar with the MVAC system or had no scientific data to support his opinion. The Defendant was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| The ASAs would like to thank the Litigation Support team, Victim/Witness Coordinator Lauren Jimenez, Sexual Assault Victim Specialist April McClellan, Chief Assistant State Attorneys Kathleen Hoague and Deisy Hernandez, Senior Trial Counsel Abbe Rifkin, and ASA John Smerznak for their help with the trial. |
| Congratulations to ASA Natalie Mendez and Sexual Battery Unit (SBU) ASA Jared Lorenz for securing a guilty verdict against Repeat Offender Court Defendant Jose Rodriguez for two counts of Attempted First-Degree Murder, two counts of Attempted Second-Degree Murder, and one count of Felon in Possession of a Firearm. The jurors heard a trifurcated trial that separated the determination of the case into three phases: 1) the Attempted Murder charges, 2) the Felon in Possession charge, and 3) the determination of recidivist sentencing enhancements under Erlinger. The Defendant now faces a life minimum mandatory sentence as a 3xVFO and as a VCC. |
| As the defense acknowledged in their opening, this was a case about a mass shooting. The four Victims worked at El Meneo Restaurant in Miami Gardens. On December 30, 2022, just one day before New Year’s Eve, Victim 1 went to get balloons for the restaurant at the Dollar Tree store in the same plaza. As she returned to the restaurant, she noticed the Defendant, who was uttering words to her that she could not understand, was trailing behind her so closely that she could have touched him if she turned around. As she approached the restaurant with the Defendant still following her, she told Victim 2 what had just happened with this man. Victim 1 immediately went inside the restaurant where Victims 3 and 4 were. Victim 2 saw that Victim 1 was shaken up and frightened. Victim 2 told the Defendant to leave her alone and or he would call the police. The Defendant replied, “I can look at what I want” and “I can do what I want.” Then he left. |
| A few minutes later, Victim 2 and Victim 4 were in front of the restaurant preparing the chalk board with the restaurant’s daily specials when the Defendant returned, pulled out a firearm from the front pocket of his hoodie, and said, “Do you want to see how you’re going to die right now?” Then he fired multiple times in the direction of Victim 2 and Victim 4, and straight into the restaurant where Victim 1, Victim 3, and their customers were. Thankfully, not a single person was injured or killed. |
| During trial, the ASAs faced civilian witness challenges. First, Victim 1 now lived out-of-state and had to take a 6AM flight to be in Miami and testify as the first witness. Second, Victim 2 gave the State major difficulties with scheduling and coming in to testify. Judge Tinkler Mendez had to bring him into the courtroom and tell him a material witness bond would be issued if he did not appear for trial the next day. With much reluctance, Victim 2 appeared the next day. The remaining two civilians did not testify. |
| There were several CCTV videos in this case, but despite its best efforts, the State lacked the ability to admit them under the rules of evidence. However, the Defendant made certain statements pertaining to each one of the videos, and in response, the State was permitted to enter all videos into evidence. The jury found the Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| To establish the Defendant’s recidivist status, the ASAs adopted the sample jury instructions from the Florida Bar’s website for HO, HVO, and VCC (there currently is none for 3xVFO, and it needed to be done as well). With the assistance of ROC Court Assistant Chief Kioceaia Stenson, the ASAs were able to simplify the instructions to make it easier to understand for a jury with no legal background and put it in a PowerPoint. |
| The ASAs would like to thank victim witness counselors Kasey McPherson, Emily Perdomo, Larsen Barrera, and victim witness counselor supervisor Maria Diaz for all their efforts bringing the witnesses for trial. Thank you to Career Criminal Unit ASA Santiago Aroca for providing a sample material witness warrant in the event it was needed. They would also like to thank ASAs Dara De Lucca, Will Gonzalez, Conor Soper, Daisy Bell, and Carolina Sanchez, for their efforts, and ROC Chief Patricia Mulholland, Felony Division Chiefs Cristina Diamond and Mari Jimenez, and Senior Trial Counsel Lara Penn for their support and assistance |
Sign up to receive our newsletter. Get updates for news, events, community information and more!
