Michael A. Haber, P.A.

Michael A. Haber, P.A. DUI) and sea (e.g. BUI).

is a South Florida based "boutique" Criminal Defense Litigation practice which focuses on securing acquittals in a range of Criminal Cases from Misdemeanors to Murder and from Traffic to Trafficking, both on land (e.g.

PSA of the Day!Following are a question and a complaint that I frequently hear:- Question: "Should I hire a Criminal D...
09/03/2026

PSA of the Day!

Following are a question and a complaint that I frequently hear:

- Question: "Should I hire a Criminal Defense Lawyer or go with the Public Defender?"

- Complaint: "My "Public Pretender" isn't a "real" lawyer."

Before I stitch together and make this relevant to "The Three Cs" (i.e. Cops, Courts and Constitutions) and I need to give you a brief history lesson.

The U.S. Constitution was written in 1787, ratified in 1788, became effective in 1789, and it’s first ten (10) Amendments (collectively known as "The Bill of Rights”) were enacted in 1791. One may ask "If we already had a Constitution then why did we need a Bill of Rights?", and the answer comes from the Bill of Rights' preamble, to wit: "THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution." From this we know that the Constitution established a structural and legal framework for our system of government but it's subsequent Constitutional Amendments (not just the first 10 but all 27) set forth the various "Individual Rights" guaranteed to citizens. Taking nothing away from 26 others but focusing on The 6th, it bestows a bevvy of "Constitutional Rights" for everyone who's accused of a Crime (e.g. to a Speedy Trial, Public Trial, local Trial, Impartial Jury, Notice of the Charges, Confrontation of one's Accuser and to Compel the presence of defense witnesses), but the only 6th Amendment pledge that we'll address is a promise that "[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to... the Assistance of Counsel for his defense" (i.e. the "Right to Counsel").

History lesson complete let's get back to the above question and complaint, which I'll first address individually and then collectively apply to The Criminal Process.

- Question: "Should I hire a Criminal Defense Lawyer or go with the Public Defender?" Answer: This is a binary situation and one in which there's no choice to be made. Either you can ("can" meaning that a Judge has determined that you have the ability - regardless of convenience or desire - to do so) afford to hire private counsel (in which case you must do so) or you can't (in which case a lawyer must be appointed to represent you). Otherwise stated: Only if you're declared "indigent" is Court Appointed Counsel required and if you're not declared "indigent" then you must either hire a lawyer or Self-Represent. (Aside alert: If you're able to hire a lawyer then regardless of comfort in so doing then if for no other reason than to free up precious and finite resources for others who're less fortunate than you you should. As to appearing "Pro Se" there's a solid basis for Abraham Lincoln's age old quote that "He who represents himself has a fool for a client".)

- Complaint: "My Public Pretender isn't a "real" lawyer." After 34+ years of Criminal Defense Litigation experience very little gets under my skin, but one of those things that gives me "Pon Farr" (shout out to Gene Roddenberry and Season 2 Episode 1 of Star Trek entitled "Amok Time", wherein his Vulcan character, Mr. Spock, experiences a periodic, "overpowering hormone imbalance" causing insanity, loss of self-control, and ultimately death every seven years) is what I refer to as "PD Bashing", and as to this I have two thoughts. First, I've been working side-by-side with Public Defenders for my entire career and I know first hand that while they may not be able to offer the time and personalized attention that private lawyers are supposed to bring to the table (sadly far too many private lawyers are "Snake Oil Salesmen", taking your money and being far less effective than their PD counterparts), PD's are almost always all excellent attorneys who're extremely well-versed in the law and their assigned Criminal Courtrooms. Second, it's not easy to get hired as or to remain employed as an PD; rather it takes brains, ethics, effort and commitment to an often times thankless job and attorneys who aren't fully committed to the task simply don't last. Finally, for those who do the client benefits not only from the day-to-day knowledge of their Courtrooms (including but not limited to knowing the tendencies of their Judge, their Prosecutors and the other instrumental court personnel) but also from the vast resources that the Public Defender's Office brings to the table (e.g. investigators, experts, etcetera) without any expense to the client.

I want to be clear that Public Defenders are not "Pretenders"; rather they're "Liberty's Last Champion" (aside alert: I'm a lifetime member of FACDL-Miami but I make no apology for "borrowing" that tagline from the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers / FACDL). I'd also like to give a gratuitous shout out to The 305's own Honorable Carlos J. Martinez, our superstar elected Public Defender and his entire Miami-Dade Public Defender's Office (which includes far more than just lawyers), all of whom selflessly and ceaselessly strive to ensure "justice for all" and that no one is steamrolled by "the system" (when I say "no one" I mean it, as Carlos et. al. go well out of their way help the "Private Defense Bar" in a variety of ways, from simple things like providing a location agreeable to The State for depositions to sponsoring CLE / Continuing Legal Education seminars to more complex matters like pursuing a never ending stream of local Criminal Appeals to filing Amicus Briefs in Florida Supreme Court cases to providing real time support to local private Criminal Defense Counsel).

If you legit can't afford to hire privately and must be represented by Court Appointed Counsel (be it a PD, "Regional Counsel" or a Special Appointed Public Defender), then be grateful, patient and understanding, know that you're almost certainly in good hands (note also that the odds of your hiring a "bad", ineffective private lawyer are far better than your being assigned a "bad", ineffective PD) and take it upon yourself to schedule routine (bi-weekly or monthly) meetings (be it telephonic, via Zoom, in person or otherwise) so that you can stay on top of your Criminal Case.

Shameless plug alert: If you've not yet done so then please join the 2,839 subscribers to 's YouTube Channel / VideoFAQ at www.youtube.com/c/michaelhaberlaw who've contributed to 759,965 views and which presently contains 419 short, informative and hopefully entertaining "Webisodes" including several on The 6th, PDs, Private Lawyers and (insert snarky comment here) Lawyer Ethics such as:

- 403) Are Public Defenders “Real” Lawyers? @ https://youtu.be/pl7-7qS9KkI

- 404) Should I hire a Private Lawyer or use the Public Defender? @ https://youtu.be/IvSn1aPXD4g

- 405) Why should I hire Private Counsel instead of the Public Defender? @ https://youtu.be/uw8IOdFHw6Y

- 406) What happens if I don’t like my Public Defender? @ https://youtu.be/dLH-VbWXGhw

- 407) How do I get a new Public Defender / What’s a Nelson Hearing”? @ https://youtu.be/IUeH8bXt4rw

That said if you're in the market to hire a private Criminal Defense Lawyer and make the wise decision to retain then you'll benefit from the following " Truths":

- We're established in 1991;
- We've no history of professional discipline whatsoever;
- We've earned hundreds of 5-Star Client Reviews;
- We're easily reachable by phone, email or on the internet;
- We practice open, honest, direct and frequent communication;
- We take a "Global Approach" to both you and your case;
- We come to understand you and your situation;
- We adopt your interests as our own;
- We identify and secure a realistic litigation objective;
- We quote and honor a reasonable fee (in writing);
- We rapidly investigate and prepare your case;
- We concurrently prepare precautionary mitigation materials;
- We won't engage in delay, grovel, kowtow, stipulation or surrender;
- We relentlessly challenge State Witnesses and State Evidence;
- We'll highlight inconsistencies in State witnesses and evidence;
- We strategically wield the Rules of Evidence;
- We tactically manipulate the Rules of Criminal Procedure;
- We ethically employ guile to accomplish our Client's goal;
- We take advantage of any Loophole / Technicality;
- We artfully conduct Voir Dire / Jury Selection;
- We masterfully employ the art of Cross-Examination;
- We conjure and make persuasive argument;
- We'll emphasize both conflicts in and any lack of evidence;
- We'll constantly remind the Trier of Fact of their constitutional duty to afford you Due Process; and
- We'll move Heaven and Earth to achieve your goal, secure your acquittal and restore your good name.

Should you, a friend, a loved one or even someone that you {don't particularly like but happen to} know be in a jam with the criminal justice system then you can rest assured that either retaining or recommending will not only reflect well on you but will provide the client with unwavering, relentless, honest advocacy.

Established in 1991 and with no history whatsoever of any form of professional discipline, is readily available to have open, honest dialogue with potential clients and to quote and honor reasonable fees after identifying a realistic litigation objective. We're proud of our unblemished, time proven record of both having our client's "6:00", 24-7-365, 360° and of providing boutique, creative, effective, unwavering and zealous , , , , , , , , , and and representation to it's clientele, primarily in , on matters ranging from DUI to and from to .

At "it's all about "!

YT: www.youtube.com/c/MichaelHaberLaw
FB: www.facebook.com/Miami.Criminal.Lawyer
X: www.twitter.com/Sharky910
URL: www.criminallaw.miami
E-Mail: [email protected]
Toll Free: 1-888-SHARK-8-1
Cell: 305-798-2220

PSA of the Day!Judges: Unless you're a Lawyer, Clerk, Cop, Probation Officer, Bailiff, Judicial Assistant, Law Clerk, ...
09/02/2026

PSA of the Day!

Judges: Unless you're a Lawyer, Clerk, Cop, Probation Officer, Bailiff, Judicial Assistant, Law Clerk, Paralegal, Legal Secretary, Court Security Officer, professional litigant, etcetera then when you think of Judges you probably think of Caddyshack's Judge Elihu Smails, Night Court's Judge Harry Stone, the Simpsons' Judge Constance Harm, My Cousin Vinny's Judge Chamberlain Haller or Judge Judy, Judge Janine, Judge Dredd or perhaps even Judge Reinhold.

Excepting Judge Judy Sheindlin and Judge Janine Pirro (both of whom were real world Prosecutors and Judges) and Edward Ernest "Judge" Reinhold (an actor who's played many fictional characters ironically none of which was a Judge, but his stage name is "Judge" so there's that...) all of the aforementioned "Judges" are fictional characters in fake, exaggerated roles. In the real world Judges, like everyone else on the planet, are people too, albeit people with robes (not Hugh Heffner robes, though I knew a local Judge who wore a fuchsia robe) and gavels and who wield a lot of power.

Article III of the U.S. Constitution deals with Judges, albeit Federal Judges (a/k/a “Article III Judges”), specifically appointment, tenure, and payment of SCOTUS / United States Supreme Court Justices, Federal Circuit Judges and U.S. District Judges, all of whom are nominated for appointment by the President and must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Article III, Section 1 created SCOTUS and gave Congress authority to create lower Federal Courts. (Aside alert: Congress established 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals, 94 U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Court of Claims, the U.S. Court of International Trade and the U.S. Bankruptcy Courts. In addition Congress created a subspecies called "Magistrate Judges" who handle many matters in various Federal Trial Courts.)

As to State Courts, each of the 50 States are sentient, with their own individual Constitutions and Statutes / Laws establishing their own pattern and practices. While States tend to mimic The Feds (e.g. each has a "Court of Last Resort", usually known as a the State Supreme Court, Appellate and Trial Courts) there's also differences in nomenclature. Here in the Sunshine State we follow The Feds in naming our highest Court the "Florida Supreme Court", followed by Courts of Appeal (albeit in Florida these intermediary Courts are called "District Courts" whereas in the Federal system they're called "Circuit Courts") and with Trial Courts (which, in the Free State of Florida are "Circuit Courts" whereas The Feds call them "District Courts"); but in the State of New York the "Court of Appeals" is it's highest court with four inferior Appellate Divisions that hear cases from the various Trial Courts (which, in New York are called "Supreme Courts"). States also vary in the manner in which Judges come to serve, for instance here in Florida Judges are elected to set terms, must run for reelection and can only be appointed by the Governor to fill a vacancy (e.g. when a Judge retires or has been removed from office) and as far as I know Rhode Island is the only State that follows the Federal appointment model (i.e. the Governor appoints Judges who serve for life).

The words "neutral and detached" and "impartial" don't appear anywhere in the Bill of Rights; rather these terms have either been constructed by Courts when interpreting the Constitution, have been codified and imposed by Congress or have been mandated by a Supreme Court (be it State or Federal) as standards for Judicial Conduct (i.e. as a de facto control mechanism for Judges who, for whatever reason, "go rogue"). More specifically:

- The 4th Amendment says: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The words "neutral and detached" are absent but U.S. Supreme Court case law imposes an obligation that warrants issue by a "disinterested" person and not "by the officer engaged in the often competitive enterprise of ferreting out crime".

- The 6th Amendment says: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense." While our Founding Fathers required an "impartial jury" nothing is mentioned about the integrity of the Judge, thus prompting the creation of various "Judicial Canons" which, among other things require a lack of political, personal or financial motivation.

Tying this to and Dr. Evil wearing a robe / judicial gown: Noting that it's the exception to the rule the point of today's PSA is to point out that while we expect Judges to be "fair" (i.e. "neutral and detached" / "impartial") because they're human Judges are subject to "The Human Condition" (i.e. the same frailness as everyone else on the planet, e.g. good moods, bad moods, bias', prejudices, a good night's sleep, lack of sleep, family issues, health concerns, financial problems... the list is endless). Still, due to the extraordinary role that Judges hold in society and not withstanding their being subject to the very same "human conditions" as anyone else, Judges are held to higher standards than civilians. As such The Feds and each State have rules for Judges (a/k/a "Judicial Canons"). In Florida it's called "The Code of Judicial Conduct" and is summed up as follows:

Canon 1. A Judge Shall Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary

Canon 2. A Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all of the Judge's Activities

Canon 3. A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently

Canon 4. A Judge Is Encouraged to Engage in Activities to Improve the Law, the Legal System, and the Administration of Justice

Canon 5. A Judge Shall Regulate Extrajudicial Activities to Minimize the Risk of Conflict With Judicial Duties

Canon 6. Fiscal Matters of a Judge Shall be Conducted in a Manner That Does Not Give the Appearance of Influence or Impropriety; etc.

Canon 7. A Judge or Candidate for Judicial Office Shall Refrain From Inappropriate Political Activity

Following is a link to Florida's Code of Judicial Conduct ~ https://www.floridasupremecourt.org/Opinions/Judicial-Ethics-Advisory-Committee/Code-of-Judicial-Conduct

Canons notwithstanding it's a fact that some Judges tend to "favor" the State while others are more "defense oriented", some side with people of their own genders, religion, sexually orientation or other commonalities, some will operate with provable bias or prejudice and on rarer occasions some preside with "political, personal or financial motivation"; but the overwhelming majority of "conflicts" with Judges occur simply because of "The Human Condition" (again "good moods, bad moods, bias', prejudices, a good night's sleep, lack of sleep, family issues, health concerns, financial problems... the list is endless)". Regardless of the "why" of it if this happens to you then your Criminal Defense Lawyer must protect you from both the Prosecutor and the Court.

It's a significant part of your Defense Lawyer's job to anticipate in-Court battles with expected adversaries (e.g. Prosecutors and State Witnesses) and as such we naturally and regularly challenge them; yet I often have to "manage" the Judge who, for any reason (many of which are listed above) fails to honor the ethical obligation to be disinterested, nonpartisan, unbiased and an equitable arbiter of fact and law (or one who simply makes a series of dreadful rulings in a given case).

Although I won't sit back and permit a Judge to abuse her / his authority by crippling my client I also can't prevent a Judge (who, in her/ his Courtroom is a proverbial Queen or King) from doing whatever it is that s/he's determined to do; still, if I perceive that a Judge is being hostile to my client then in the most professional of manners I'll address my concerns with the Court, in real time and on the record.

With the exception of Judge Dredd (a fictional character who's role combines that of Police, Judge, Jury and Executioner), no matter who your Judge may be and irrespective of her / his mood, attitude or demeanor you can rest entirely assured that will hold your Judge to her / his obligation of giving you a fair forum.

Should you, a friend, a loved one or even someone that you {don't particularly like but happen to} know be in a jam with the criminal justice system then you can rest assured that either retaining or recommending will not only reflect well on you but will provide the client with unwavering, relentless, honest advocacy.

Established in 1991 and with no history whatsoever of any form of professional discipline, is readily available to have open, honest dialogue with potential clients and to quote and honor reasonable fees after identifying a realistic litigation objective. We're proud of our unblemished, time proven record of both having our client's "6:00", 24-7-365, 360° and of providing boutique, creative, effective, unwavering and zealous , , , , , , , , , and and representation to it's clientele, primarily in , on matters ranging from DUI to and from to .

At "it's all about "!

YT: www.youtube.com/c/MichaelHaberLaw
FB: www.facebook.com/Miami.Criminal.Lawyer
X: www.twitter.com/Sharky910
URL: www.criminallaw.miami
E-Mail: [email protected]
Toll Free: 1-888-SHARK-8-1
Cell: 305-798-2220

PSA of the Day!Today is September 1st and on this day, in 1939 (87 years ago) Germany invaded Poland, marking the star...
09/01/2026

PSA of the Day!

Today is September 1st and on this day, in 1939 (87 years ago) Germany invaded Poland, marking the start of World War II.

"The September Campaign" (i.e. N**i Germany's attack upon and invasion of the Republic of Poland) lasted for 35 days (beginning on September 1st, 1939 and ending on October 6th, 1939). Although the German propaganda machine labeled it as a "defensive war" it was nothing shy of a strategic all-out-offensive, whereby Germany sought expansion by invading Poland in order to gain territory and rule over it's neighbor immediately to the East. The Third Reich may have labeled this as "defensive" but history proves that this sort of “Blitzkrieg” strategy was Hi**er's "go-to" warfare philosophy.

[Run-on sentence alert:] "Blitzkrieg" is a military term for a surprise attack that incorporates rapid and overwhelming ground forces coupled with air and marine support so as to break through an opponent's lines of defense, dislocating and unbalancing the defenders, rendering it difficult to respond to a continuously changing front and earning a victory in a decisive battle by sheer annihilation. The key elements to a successful Blitzkrieg are "shock and surprise", battlefield fluidity, initiative and flexibility among officers on the arena, rapid movement into the enemy's rear echelons (especially at night), self-sufficiency of mechanized units and tactical air and marine superiority. (Aside alert: The "American version" of a blitzkrieg is referred to as "Rapid Dominance", a/k/a "Shock and Awe", and was developed for the U.S. Military by the National Defense University of the United States. Our preeminent example occurred during Operation Desert Storm, which began with an aerial bombing campaign against Iraq on January 17th 1991 and ended with Kuwait's liberation on February 28, 1991. This US-led Blitzkrieg effectively collapsed Iraq via "both the physical destruction of appropriate infrastructure and the shutdown and control of the flow of all vital information and associated commerce so rapidly as to achieve a level of national shock akin to the effect that dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on the Japanese." But I digress, so lets get back to the feral, subhuman alleged A***n "superior race" and their abominable attempt at conquering the world and purging it of Jews, Blacks, G**s, Jehovah’s Witnesses; Handicapped, Gypsies, Soviets and others.

Putting "The September Campaign" into true historical perspective, at 04:45 am on September 1st, 1939 a German battleship in the Baltic Sea opened fire on a Polish military transit depot in the City of Danzig. Concurrently, "The Luftwaffe" (the German Air Force) attacked a number of military and civilian targets, including the City of Wieluń, which was the first large-scale city bombing of what would shortly become WWII. By 8:00 am German ground units, which had preemptively crossed the Polish border, attacked near the village of Mokra (this is known as the "Battle of the Border"). So, during the course of one day (September 1st, 1939) Germany relentlessly attacked Poland from all directions and on all fronts. This Blitzkrieg (again, simultaneous assaults by air, land and sea) ultimately converged into the Polish capital of Warsaw, which formally surrendered to Hi**er's army on September 27, 1939, a mere 26 days later.

Unless you're a N**i-sympathizer none of this is "happy", "heart-warming" dinner table or campfire discussion; however, it's both an accurate historical report and an absolutely critical veracious recounting the past. (Aside alert: In 1948 Winston Churchill famously said during a speech to the British House of Commons that “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”; but The British Bulldog didn't coin the phrase, rather my research suggests that the phrase “Those who don't remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” was first written ½ century earlier, in 1905, by George Santayana, a Spanish-American philosopher, essayist, poet, and novelist in "The Life of Reason", which is a part of his series entitled "Great Ideas of Western Man".) Yes, that was yet another technical digression but given all too many would-be history revisionists and the foreseeable damage that'll come from re-writing of the annals of the past, the war presently waging in The Middle East, the inane anti-Israel protests raging throughout the United States and despicable global resurgence of antisemitism we'd be wise to remember and acknowledge the true events of bygone times, lest we should fall victim to repeat the same due to willful blindness and ignorance.

While I accept other's 1st Amendment rights and not withstanding my oath as a lawyer to uphold the U.S. Constitution, I'm personally unabashed in my disdain (make that repugnance and abhorrence) for N**is, Neo-N**is or any form of N**i-sympathizer. They may have a right to be vile, malevolent savages but I too have a right to have, hold and proclaim my own opinion. With that in mind in remembrance of the commencement of The September Campaign, the start of WWII, the Third Reich, Adolf Hi**er and all of his N**i ilk I'll spend the day watching Quentin Tarantino's iconic flick "Inglourious Basterds" from start to finish, I'll also watch the legendary Tarantino scene from his more recent flick "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" (i.e. the one where they promo the imaginary "Rick Dalton" (Leonardo DiCaprio) flick "The 14 Fists of McCluskey", wherein Rick / Leo played a eyepatch-wearing N**i hunter who wipes out the High Command from a balcony with a flamethrower), I may even catch a few choice moments of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and, time permitting, I'll watch the more recent flick "Sisu", a 2022 Finnish flick that's set during the Lapland War between Finland and N**i Germany at the tail end WWII, wherein "a legendary Finnish Army commando turned gold prospector" has to defend himself from being robbed and murdered by a Waffen-SS platoon led by an infamously brutal and corrupt officer.

Noting that it's not my place to tell anyone else what to do, believe or how to live their lives (otherwise stated: I can only control the trajectory of my own life and recognize that it's impossible for me to dictate that of others) that's my plan and I push it on no one, but if you've not seen any of those flicks and if you have the stomach for violence, some brutal (e.g. "Inglourious Basterds", especially "The Jew Bear") and some satirical (e.g. Sisu is a Finn version of a Sergio Leone "Spaghetti Western") then I highly recommend both flicks as being fun, entertaining and reminiscent of "The Holocaust", which effectively began 87 years ago today. I also encourage you to reflect on the sage advise of Santayana and Churchill, to wit: that "history-deniers" are doomed to repeat history. While we need not "cherish" the past we must not "forget", "ignore", "rewrite" or otherwise "tamper" with history.

One final aside: Should you, a friend, a loved one or even someone that you {don't particularly like but happen to} know be in a jam with the Criminal Justice System then you can rest assured that will "blitzkrieg" the State by relentlessly challenging and highlighting inconsistencies by and between State Witnesses and State Evidence, strategically wielding the Rules of Evidence, tactically manipulating the Rules of Criminal Procedure, ethically employing guile to accomplish your goal; taking advantage of any Loophole / Technicality, artfully conducting Jury Selection, masterfully employing the art of Cross-Examination, conjuring and making persuasive argument, emphasizing conflicts in and lack of evidence, constantly reminding the Trier of Fact (i.e. Judge or Jury) of their constitutional duty to afford you Due Process and we'll move Heaven and Earth to achieve your goal, secure your acquittal and restore your good name.

Established in 1991 and with no history whatsoever of any form of professional discipline, is readily available to have open, honest dialogue with potential clients and to quote and honor reasonable fees after identifying a realistic litigation objective. We're proud of our unblemished, time proven record of both having our client's "6:00", 24-7-365, 360° and of providing boutique, creative, effective, unwavering and zealous , , , , , , , , , and and representation to it's clientele, primarily in , on matters ranging from DUI to and from to .

At "it's all about "!

YT: www.youtube.com/c/MichaelHaberLaw
FB: www.facebook.com/Miami.Criminal.Lawyer
X: www.twitter.com/Sharky910
URL: www.criminallaw.miami
E-Mail: [email protected]
Toll Free: 1-888-SHARK-8-1
Cell: 305-798-2220

PSA of the Day!"Circumstantial Evidence": It's far from categorical proof but when wielded properly it's damning. You ...
08/31/2026

PSA of the Day!

"Circumstantial Evidence": It's far from categorical proof but when wielded properly it's damning. You don't have to take my word for it, rather listen to:

- Bernard Goldberg: "Circumstantial evidence is evidence".

- Henry David Thoreau: "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk." (Aside alert: This Thoreau quote inspired Arthur Conan Doyle to opine that "circumstantial evidence is occasionally very convincing, as when you find a trout in the milk, to quote Thoreau's example", but he'd go on to say:)

- Arthur Conan Doyle: "Circumstantial evidence is a very tricky thing. It may seem to point very straight to one thing, but if you shift your own point of view a little, you may find it pointing in an equally uncompromising manner to something entirely different."

And that, my friends, is the abject lesson of today's PSA.

"Circumstantial Evidence" is defined as "evidence which is not drawn from the direct observation of a fact in issue". It's "Indirect Evidence" which, on its face, doesn't itself prove a fact; rather it gives rise to an inference that a fact at issue exists. Circumstantial Evidence indirectly points toward a conclusion but lacks it's own ability to conclusively prove a point; instead requiring one to draw upon additional inference(s) in order to support a claim. It's the exact opposite of "Direct Evidence" (which patently supports the truth of an assertion sans a need for any additional evidence or inference) as, again, Circumstantial Evidence necessarily relies upon inference to connect it to an ultimate conclusion. This may seem complicated but once you get the idea it's not that abstruse.

Consider this: If a witness testifies that she saw me shoot someone, then that's Direct Evidence (it’s also called "Eyewitness Testimony" but it’s still Direct Evidence) but if that same witness testifies that she heard a gun shot and seconds later saw me fleeing the area then in order to connect me to the shooting one would have to employ inference to bridge the gap between my merely running away from the scene of a shooting to my having been the shooter. Other facts that could lead to the conclusion that I was the shooter could include further testimony (also circumstantial) that the victim and I hated each other or someone heard me say I was going to kill that person; perhaps a Forensics Expert is able via a Ballistics Examination to link a gun that I own being the one that discharged the bullet that killed the victim. Taken together such a series of independent facts might (or might not) be enough to support an inference that I was the killer.

Aside alert: Up until 1981 Florida had a "Standard Jury Instruction" on Circumstantial Evidence (f/k/a Florida Standard Criminal Jury Instruction 2.14) but the Florida Supreme Court eliminated it by finding that if a Jury is properly instructed on the issue of the State's "Burden of Proof" (to wit: proof "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt") then a Circumstantial Evidence instruction is “confusing and incorrect.” (For the benefit of anyone who may care, the former Florida Standard Criminal Jury Instruction 2.14 read as follows: "Circumstantial evidence is legal evidence and a crime (any fact to be proved) may be proved by such evidence. A well-connected chain of circumstances is as conclusive, in proving a crime (fact), as is positive evidence. Its value is dependent upon its conclusive nature and tendency. Circumstantial evidence is governed by the following rules: 1. The circumstances themselves must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. The circumstances must be consistent with guilt and inconsistent with innocence. 3. The circumstances must be of such a conclusive nature and tendency that you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of defendant's guilt (the fact to be proved). If the circumstances are susceptible of two reasonable constructions, one indicating guilt and the other innocence, you must accept that construction indicating innocence. Circumstances which, standing alone, are insufficient to prove or disprove any fact may be considered by you in weighing direct and positive testimony.") On this issue I disagree with the FLSC, but then again I'm not a Justice so my take doesn't count.

Turning our attention to "Mittens" (the adorable kitty below who's covered in shredded toilet paper): By simply looking at her / him one could easily infer that s/he tore-up a roll of TP and is therefore guilty of Criminal Mischief... but did s/he? If no one saw Mittens do it and there's no video surveillance then surely other plausible explanations exist (i.e. there's "Reasonable Doubt" as to Mittens' guilt). Perhaps someone / something else is responsible for the destruction and Mittens simply took advantage of the existing carnage to snuggle up and take a nap. Maybe another cat, dog, child or "Ailurophobe" (an "ailurophobe" is a person with a persistent and excessive fear of cats... a/k/a someone with a motive to set Mittens up for the fall...) is guilty. The point is that absent direct evidence that Mittens shredded the TP, logical as it may seem and damning as it may appear, you'd have to use inference to establish Mittens' guilt.

It's a psychological fact that people intentionally and unconsciously employ inferences to come to conclusions (e.g. a yawn infers being tired and slamming a door infers anger) but following are examples of how circumstantial evidence comes into play with regard to "The Three Cs" (to wit: Cops, Courts and Constitutions):

- At the outset of most Police Investigations a Cop will ask a citizen to provide information, and in any such Police-Citizen Encounter a witness may provide first-hand knowledge or state as fact something that was inferred and not actually witnessed;

- If Johnny Law lacks direct evidence of Probable Cause s/he can use "supposition and reason" to justify an Arrest;

- Prosecutors frequently employ Circumstantial Evidence in a "conviction quest"; and

- Although there's no longer a Standard Jury Instruction in Florida on Circumstantial Evidence the law is clear that a Jury is permitted to consider, and even to convict, using the same.

Shameless plug and relevant aside alert: If you've not yet done so then please subscribe to 's YouTube Channel / VideoFAQ at www.youtube.com/c/michaelhaberlaw with 419 short, informative and hopefully entertaining "Webisodes" including these beauties:

- # 244) What is Circumstantial Evidence? @ https://youtu.be/Ym4VCYR-mk8

- # 245) Can I be arrested with only circumstantial evidence? @ https://youtu.be/shgo-0HhLS0 and

- # 246) Can I be convicted with only circumstantial evidence? @ https://youtu.be/FjEPHkHrc0U

Appearing, looking or seeming guilty may be enough for The PoPo to Arrest, book and charge you, and an Assistant State Attorney can file and pursue charges based on the same, but in Criminal Court you remain innocent unless and until the State meets it's burden of establishing your guilt "BARD". That said unless it's excluded by a Judge if it's relevant then any evidence, including "circumstantial", is admissible.

If you hire as your Criminal Defense Lawyer then when I walk into a Criminal Courtroom I'm armed with 34+ years of litigation experience. I'll strategically wield the Rules of Evidence, tactically manipulate the Rules of Criminal Procedure, employ guile and take advantage of any Loophole or Technicality which may inure to your benefit. I'll challenge everything and cede nothing as I dissect a circumstantial case like a skilled coroner conducting an autopsy, demonstrating the crossroads between fact and fiction, certainty and supposition, actuality and assumption. I'll expose inferences for what they are (to wit: "a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning", as opposed to a concrete facts) and then offer plausible hypothesis for alternative conclusions. I'll argue that based upon the evidence (as well as the lack of evidence and conflicts in evidence) there's "Reasonable Doubt", the State failed to meet its Burden of Proof and the Jury must return a verdict of "Not Guilty".

Still in any case, but most especially in a circumstantial one, your silence is truly golden, so if you fail to (i.e. "Shut-Up and Lawyer-Up" / invoke both The 5th and The 6th) and instead choose to make statements, then you're both helping the State and handicapping your case and your lawyer, so please - pretty please even - be like Mittens (i.e. look cute, innocent and say nothing).

Should you, a friend, a loved one or even someone that you {don't particularly like but happen to} know be in a jam with the criminal justice system then you can rest assured that either retaining or recommending will not only reflect well on you but will provide the client with unwavering, relentless, honest advocacy.

Established in 1991 and with no history whatsoever of any form of professional discipline, is readily available to have open, honest dialogue with potential clients and to quote and honor reasonable fees after identifying a realistic litigation objective. We're proud of our unblemished, time proven record of both having our client's "6:00", 24-7-365, 360° and of providing boutique, creative, effective, unwavering and zealous , , , , , , , , , and and representation to it's clientele, primarily in , on matters ranging from DUI to and from to .

At "it's all about "!

YT: www.youtube.com/c/MichaelHaberLaw
FB: www.facebook.com/Miami.Criminal.Lawyer
X: www.twitter.com/Sharky910
URL: www.criminallaw.miami
E-Mail: [email protected]
Toll Free: 1-888-SHARK-8-1
Cell: 305-798-2220

Address

Miami, FL
33125

Telephone

+13057982220

Website

, ,

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Michael A. Haber, P.A. posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Michael A. Haber, P.A.:

Shortcuts

Featured

Share

Category