In this time of increased federal and state regulation and extended criminalization of individual and business activities, the criminal defense lawyers of Charles B. Lembcke, P.A. assist those who are being scrutinized by law enforcement and regulatory agencies. For each client, we bring to bear our extensive experience and thorough preparation in handling federal and state investigations and defense of criminal charges. We devote our energies to thoroughly researching the particular regulatory area, creatively strategizing each case, engaging prominent experts to assist in the defense and testify at trial and taking the case to trial.
Some of our recent criminal cases include:
State v. Robert Benzing, 04-1982-CFE (Circuit Court, Seminole County).
Our client was charged with conspiracy to traffic in cocaine (more than 400 gms), a first degree felony with a 15 year minimum mandatory sentence. We filed and argued a motion to dismiss (C-4) the charge. On November 1, 2005, the trial judge entered an order dismissing the criminal charge and discharging our client from prosecution. The State did not appeal.
State v. Jonathon Moore, 02-11909-CFS (Circuit Court, Duval County).
Our client, the CEO of a Jacksonville-based beverage company, was charged with fraud involving a security interest arising out of a fee dispute with a Jacksonville law firm. We argued three motions to dismiss successfully. On September 18, 2003, the trial judge entered a final order dismissing the charge and discharging our client from prosecution. The State has appealed.
State v. Jonathon Moore, 892 So.2d 1218, 2005 WL 350321 (Fla. 1st DCA, February 15, 2005). The appellate court has affirmed the dismissal of the criminal charges against our client.
United States v. Lambert, 3:01-cr-251(S2)-J-25TEM, M.D. Fla. (2002). Our client was one of more than 50 charged with conspiracy to defraud in connection with McDonald's Monopoly games. Following a month-long trial, our client was the only one the jury found not guilty.
United States v. Whiteside, 285 F.3d 1345 (11th Cir. 2002). This was the criminal prosecution arising out of the federal government's healthcare fraud investigation into Columbia/HCA. We were both trial and appellate counsel. Upon appeal, the Eleventh Circuit reversed Mr. Whiteside's conviction. The court held that, where the truth or falsity of a statement centers upon an interpretive question of law, the government bears the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement is not true under a reasonable interpretation of the law.
The lawyers of Charles B. Lembcke, P.A. distinguish themselves in complex civil litigation, including factually and legally complex cases. Much of their experience is in Federal civil proceedings. They have experience in many areas of complex civil litigation and arbitrations. Some of their recently concluded civil cases and arbitrations include:
Patterson v. Watson Realty Corporation, Case No. 96-03240-CA, (Circuit Court, Duval County). This case began as a civil case, but Watson Realty removed it for arbitration under the American Arbitration Association. We represented the Pattersons who had engaged Watson Realty to sell their riverfront home under an exclusive listing agreement. Watson Realty rushed the Pattersons into moving out of their home in anticipation of a closing for the sale of their home that never occurred. The Pattersons sued for damages and attorney's fees for breach of fiduciary duty. Following a full arbitration hearing, the arbitrator entered an award for the Pattersons on January 24, 2004, ordering Watson Realty to pay substantial damages, attorney's fees and costs.
Williams v. Obstfeld, 314 F.3d 1270, RICO Disp. Guide 10,394 (11th Cir. 2002). We were trial and appellate counsel for Eugene Grin and Global Equities and Realty, Inc. They, along with Obstfeld, were sued by the Delaware Insurance Commissioner, as receiver of National Heritage Life Insurance Company, for tens of millions of dollars under civil RICO (for triple damages) and various state law fraud claims. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Grin, Global Equities and Realty. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed. Notably, the Eleventh Circuit held that our clients could not be vicariously liable under civil RICO and the state causes of action.
Corso v. Padmanabhan, 796 So.2d 1211 (1st DCA 2001). In this securities case, we undertook the representation of a stock broker against whom a default judgment had been previously granted by the trial court. Upon appeal, we successfully argued the reversal of the default judgment. When returned to the trial court, this case was dismissed with prejudice.
