.png){kind=spacer}
SALE, MANUFACTURE, DELIVER CANNABIS (813.13(1)(a)(2))
DIVERSION
Okaloosa County, FL
October 15, 2025
Client, a non-citizen with an active ICE detainer, was charged in Okaloosa County with Sale, Manufacture, or Delivery of Cannabis (F.S. § 893.13(1)(a)(2)), a third-degree felony carrying up to 5 years in Florida State Prison and a $5,000 fine. For this client, the criminal charge was only the beginning of a cascading legal crisis. The client had been in [REDACTED] immigration detention for [REDACTED] months following the arrest, and a felony drug conviction would have triggered mandatory deportation with a permanent bar to reentry under federal immigration law. The client's [REDACTED] family members in the United States — including [REDACTED] — faced the prospect of permanent family separation. The arrest arose from a traffic stop on [REDACTED] during which law enforcement alleged they discovered [REDACTED] cannabis in the vehicle. The defense recognized that the case would be fought on two fronts: the criminal charges in Okaloosa County and the immigration consequences that would flow from any conviction.
The defense team took an aggressive, trial-ready posture from the outset, challenging the State's ability to prove the substance and intent elements of the delivery charge. We filed a comprehensive Motion to Suppress Evidence based on [REDACTED] deficiencies in the traffic stop and subsequent search, arguing that the [REDACTED] did not provide lawful basis for the search that yielded the alleged contraband. Simultaneously, we coordinated with the client's immigration counsel to understand the full immigration consequences of various potential resolutions. After months of sustained litigation pressure — during which the client remained in immigration detention — the client ultimately made the difficult personal decision to [REDACTED] and return to their country of origin. We continued to advocate on the criminal case, ultimately securing the client's entry into a diversion program that, upon completion, will result in dismissal of the felony charge and preserve the client's ability to seek lawful reentry in the future. This outcome was achieved despite the extraordinarily difficult circumstances of simultaneous criminal prosecution and immigration detention. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes; each case depends on its facts and circumstances.