State
of Florida
Office of the State Attorney
16th Judicial Circuit
|
Office of the State Attorney 16th Judicial Circuit
|
|
Criminal Justice System Overview Employment Opportunities |
April 16, 2006 About a year ago, the Key West Citizen published a news article under the eye-catching headline “Man sentenced to 15 years for cocaine sale worth $20.” It caught my eye because my office prosecuted the case. The story went on to say that a drug dealer named Terrell Hines was caught on police video making a $20 sale of crack cocaine. And Judge Wayne Miller sentenced him to 15 years in jail – the maximum term allowed by law. Some Citizen readers found the sentence unduly harsh and at least a few called into the Citizen’s Voice column to say so. But wait. If you read further, you found that Mr. Hines had a criminal history spanning his entire adult life. In fact, he had a long rap sheet of felony drug sales and violent crimes. KWPD detectives testified that Hines was “a thorn in the side of the police department and the community.” He had been out of jail only 20 days when he was arrested for the sale that landed him in prison for 15 years. So what may have appeared to be an excessive sentence was based on verifiable evidence, eyewitness testimony and indisputable criminal history. Our prosecutor characterized the sentence as “a just response to a lifetime of crime.” There’s another story in the headlines this week involving our office, but this time the mood is not so lenient. Gilbert Suarez, the former Key West superintendent of public works was caught stealing money from parking meters on May 15 last year. A search of his apartment turned up some $2,000 in stolen change as well as small amounts of cocaine and marijuana and drug paraphernalia. It’s infuriating to find out a government employee is on the take. It’s a breach of the public trust. It feels like a thief taking money out of our own pockets – and that’s exactly what it is. When the news came out that bank tellers told police that Mr. Suarez’s wife had been cashing in quarters for months, the calculators came out too. I’ve heard and read some pretty astonishing estimates of how much Mr. Suarez stole. $200,000? $520,000? But again, let’s wait. Let’s take a look at the facts of the case stripped of the “what ifs” and the “could haves.” The KWPD did exactly what it was supposed to do. When police heard about alleged criminal activity, it investigated, it gathered evidence and it stopped the crime. It found the $2,000, the drugs and drug paraphernalia. Detectives also interviewed bank tellers who said that Mrs. Suarez had brought lots of quarters into their banks and exchanged them for bills over some months. Then the case came to my office. And my office did exactly what it was supposed to do. We prosecuted the case on the basis of the verifiable evidence we had – not on basis of conjecture or speculation. The bank tellers say Mrs. Suarez exchanged lots of quarters. Does that prove the quarters were stolen? No. The bank tellers say that these exchanges occurred over some period of time. Is that admissible evidence about how much was stolen? No. Does the bank have any records to prove how much was exchanged? No. Can the City of Key West provide us with any documentation of their losses to prove theft? No. We prosecuted this case on the facts – not with “could have stolen” or “may have taken” or “suspected of having swiped.” That is how we conduct every case. And it’s not a question of ethical fussing. Our legal mandate – and the legal mandate of every prosecutor from the U. S. Attorney General down – is to be able to prove every charge “beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt.” Circuit Judge Mark Jones did exactly what he was supposed to do. He evaluated the charges in the context of Florida sentencing guidelines and gave Mr. Suarez the longest probation permitted by law. Most first-time offenders don’t get jail time and this case is no exception. And the City of Key West got exactly the amount of restitution payment it asked for. As distressing as this case is, how much more distressing would it be to live under a law enforcement and judicial system that prosecutes and convicts people on the basis of speculation and conjecture? None of us is happy about Mr. Saurez’s theft. All of us should be happy about living in a nation that gives us the legal benefit of the doubt. |
|
Last modified:
10/23/07
* Acrobat® Reader®
required to view these files.
|
