SHOCKING REPORT! The Truth About False Arrests and Wrongful Convictions!

SHOCKING REPORT!! The Truth Behind False Accusations, Misidentification and Wrongful Convictions!

(Washington, D.C. – October 2, 2014) Today the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued a SHOCKING REPORT evaluating three decades of scientific research concerning memory and eyewitness identification. Researchers did a comprehensive study of the last 30 years of basic scientific research on eyewitness identification and found that a high percentage of incorrect eyewitness identification resulted in hundreds of wrongful convictions, that were later overturned!

The landmark report detailed specific courses of action needed to improve police identification procedures and how courts should properly handle eyewitness evidence. The Innocence Project, which has been pushing for these kinds of reforms for years, urges states and courts across the U.S. to enact these crucial reforms in order to prevent future wrongful arrests and wrongful convictions.

Professor Barry Scheck, Law Professor at Cardozo Law School (my Alma Mater!) and Director of the Innocence Project, maintains “This report should serve as a powerful incentive for states and courts around the nation to enact reforms that will prevent eyewitness misidentifications. We’ve known for quite some time that eyewitness testimony is simply not as accurate as juries often believe, but we now have a definitive report that has analyzed three decades of science and makes proven recommendations for how law enforcement and the courts can prevent innocent people from being wrongly arrested and convicted.”

According to the Innocence Project, eyewitness misidentifications contributed to 72% of the hundreds of wrongful convictions that were later overturned by DNA evidence. The criminals who actually committed the crimes were eventually identified in 39% of these cases. While the innocent were suffering behind bars in these cases, the actual perpetrators committed an additional 98 additional brutally violent crimes (including rape, murder, and other extremely violent crimes).

Realizing that police procedures for eyewitness identification have a huge effect on the accuracy of a witness’s identifications, the report recommends the following steps as a way to eliminate the likelihood of wrongful convictions:

∙ Blind Administration — have an officer who is not aware of the identity of the suspect, conduct the photo or live line-up. This stops the witness from picking up any cues from the officer conducting the lineup.

∙ Confidence Statements — right after a lineup, have the eyewitness describe his level of confidence in his identification. This practice will give juries a useful tool for judging the how accurate the witness’s identification may be.

∙ Instructions — The witness viewing the lineup should be told that the actual criminal may not be among the other people in the lineup and that the investigation is moving forward regardless if the witness identifies a suspect in the lineup or not.

∙ Videotape the ID procedure — The Police should make a video recording of the identification procedure to maintain a record of the event.

Today’s stunning Report also makes hard-hitting recommendations for our courts:

∙ Conduct pre-trial judicial inquiry — Judges should actively look into the eyewitness evidence being offered into evidence. If there are red flags pointing to unreliable identifications, judges should limit the eyewitness’ testimony or give a jury instructions on how to measure the reliability of a witness’s identification based on the available scientific research.

∙ Make juries aware of prior identifications of the defendant — Since in-court identifications can unduly influence the jury, juries should be given information about any earlier identification, including the confidence the witness expressed at the time of the identification.

∙ Allow expert testimony — expert witnesses who can explain the nuances of memory and identification are critical in helping juries measure eyewitness testimony and should be allowed to testify. The report also encourages jurisdictions to fund defendants who wish to engage qualified experts.

∙ Better jury instructions — Jury instructions should educate jurors how to properly measure the factors affecting eyewitness identifications and should be tailored to the relevant facts in a particular case.

Have YOU been wrongly accused, mistakenly identified, wrongly arrested or wrongly convicted and imprisoned? Have you been erroneously implicated in a crime? Are you about to let your wrongful arrest ruin your life??

Don’t let procrastination, hesitation or fear stop you from fighting back! For your free 30-minute initial case evaluation by phone, call me, your Hollywood Criminal Defense lawyer Richard G. Salzman, today (954) 981-0336, home of South Florida’s Premier Criminal Defense Law Firm.

Let me be your Criminal Defense WARRIOR!
We accept All Major Credit Cards.
Florida Criminal Defense Law Offices of Richard G. Salzman, P.A.
4340 Sheridan St., Suite 102
Hollywood, FL 33021
(954) 981-0336
(855) DUI-GONE, (855) 384-4663

© Innocence Project, All rights reserved.
Affiliated with the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University
Facebook / Twitter /
Privacy Policy
Contact: Paul Cates,
Nick Moroni,


NOW REVEALED: 7 Secrets Your Prosecutor Doesn’t Want You To Know!

1. If every defendant insisted on their constitutional right to go to trial, the Prosecutors (Assistant State Attorneys) handling DUI cases would be in court all day long.

Assistant State Attorneys can’t spend all day in court; they are already overwhelmed with cases!

2. Now more than ever, the minimum mandatory sentences for DUI offenses are so severe, a DUI defendant has little to risk by taking their DUI case to trial.

My clients often ask “will the judge punish me with a harsher sentence if I insist on taking my DUI case to trial?” In truth, there are a few judges who will impose the maximum sentence on a defendant who loses at trial, simply because that defendant would not accept a plea-deal from the State prior to trial. Our Florida law-makers keep raising the minimum sentences for DUI violations, so that if you decide to take your case to trial and you lose, you will likely receive the same sentence as the person who pleads guilty or No Contest.

3. The Assistant State Attorney doesn’t want to be there any more than you do.

No attorneys working for the State Attorney’s Office (SAO) want a career prosecuting misdemeanor DUI cases in criminal court day after day. Any Assistant State Attorney (ASA) would rather be prosecuting high-profile felony cases than covering a traffic court docket. In fact, the Assistant State Attorney has to handle 40 to 50 other cases with criminal defense attorneys on the criminal court docket each day. In Broward County alone, there are five separate criminal courts with fifteen different Assistant State Attorneys handling criminal matters every day. The senior Assistant State Attorneys try to get assignments to the fastest judges, so they could be done with court each day as soon as possible.

4. The Assistant State Attorney is never fully prepared. She has too many cases to juggle each and every day.

In South Florida, Assistant State Attorneys DO NOT review traffic cases ahead of time because they are overloaded with case files. They barely review their DUI cases before they get to court.

And don’t be shocked when I tell you that it is impossible for me to contact any particular Assistant State Attorney with knowledge about your case before your court date to discuss your case, because the Assistant State Attorneys rarely go over their DUI cases before the court date. In fact, most DUI cases are not assigned to a designated Assistant State Attorney until the last possible minute.

5. The arresting police officer is unprepared or fails to show up.

Let’s face it, your case is just one of dozens of cases on the docket that the arresting officer has on that particular date. It is common for a police officer to have 25 to 30 DUI cases on one date in addition to dozens of other traffic tickets he has to appear on. Without fail, the arresting DUI Task Force officer has no recollection of your DUI arrest because he made hundreds of arrests before yours and hundreds of arrests after yours.

This happens over and over again in court when a police officer on the witness stand reads from his notes because he can’t remember the events of your particular DUI arrest; as a seasoned DUI defense lawyer, I always object to an officer reading from his notes and, after my objection is sustained by the judge, it becomes obvious that this officer has no independent recollection of your arrest because his answers to my cross-examination questions consists of “I don’t recall… I’m not sure… I think he did… it’s possible she said…” etc. He can’t possibly remember your arrest because he has arrested hundreds of drivers before he arrested you, and he arrested hundreds of drivers after he arrested you! He can’t be expected to remember each and every DUI arrest he made.

6. Assistant State Attorneys know very little about the so-called “science” behind field sobriety testing.

Standardized field sobriety testing (SFSTs, aka the “roadsides”) is not something taught in any law school, it’s not taught in any Driver’s Education class and it’s not found in your Florida Drivers Handbook when you prepare for your Florida Driver’s License examination… and this is because the SFSTs are not part of your Florida Driver’s License exam. You are not required to do the heel-to-toe, walk-and-turn (WAT) exercise, or the one-legged-stand (OLS) exercise in order to get your Florida Driving Permit or Florida Driver’s License. In addition, 13 states already refuse to allow Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test results into evidence in DUI cases, because like the other Standard Field Exercises (SFEs) they are unreliable in measuring any level of intoxication.

Actually, the SFSTs are not even considered “tests” by scientists and they are not recognized in the scientific community or the medical community as having any reliability in predicting intoxication. They are actually “exercises” that are designed for failure. A thorough and complete knowledge of these field sobriety exercises (FSEs) would actually hurt the Prosecutors’ DUI cases. In fact it would stop them from making the argument that the results of these exercises should be given more weight and credibility than they deserve.

For example, the SFEs used today were originally supposed to be a reliable predictor of Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) of .10 and above. But since the legal limit was lowered to .08 in 2004 in all 50 States, technically there is no weight a judge can give these “tests” on someone with a .08 or .09 BAC. The FSEs are commonly referred to as “Junk-Science” or “Fake Science” among DUI defense attorneys, scientists and those in the medical profession.

7. The arresting DUI Task Force officer did not follow proper procedures when conducting the field sobriety exercises.

When a police officer receives proper training about field sobriety exercises, he learns the proper standards and procedures used according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”). However, for example, on the “follow the pen with your eyes” test (the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, or HGN), the manual says that if the suspect moves his head during the exercise, the officer should use his flashlight or his free hand as a chin-rest for the suspect.

In my experience as an aggressive criminal defense lawyer, I have never had an arresting DUI Task Force officer testify that he used anything as a chin-rest for a DUI suspect… even though that officer will testify that the DUI suspect was swaying side-to-side and unsteady on his feet.

The NHTSA manual also indicates that the walk-and-turn (WAT) and one-legged- stand (OLS) exercise should not be done if the suspect is more than 50 pounds overweight or has physical limitations that could affect his balance. The manual also states that the walk-and-turn exercise “requires a line that the suspect can see.” In my experience, this warning is almost always ignored by the testing DUI Task Force officer.

If you have been arrested for a DUI you owe it to yourself to call me, Hollywood DUI lawyer, Richard G. Salzman, Esq. for your FREE 30-minute telephone consultation.

Despite what you may think, getting arrested for Drunk Driving is no longer a hopeless case. Whether it’s your 1st DUI, 2nd DUI, or 3rd DUI… everyone knows that hiring a skilled and aggressive DUI attorney is your ticket to fighting and beating the DUI charges against you. In fact, there are many powerful and effective strategies I can use for fighting and beating your misdemeanor DUI or felony DUI charge, or at least keeping adverse consequences to a minimum.

Don’t let procrastination, hesitation or fear stop you from fighting back! For your free 30-minute initial case evaluation by phone, call me, Hollywood DUI lawyer Richard G. Salzman, today (855) DUI-GONE (855-384-4663), home of South Florida’s Premier DUI Defense Law Firm.

Let me be your DUI Defense WARRIOR!
We accept All Major Credit Cards.

Florida DUI Defense Law Offices of Richard G. Salzman, P.A.
4340 Sheridan St., Suite 102
Hollywood, FL 33021
(954) 981-0336
(855) DUI-GONE, (855) 384-4663

The content contained herein is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or legal opinions. It is only offered for general informational purposes. The information is intended, but not promised to be current, complete or up-to-date.

7 Simple Questions That Can Result in DISMISSAL of your DUI case!

7 Simple Questions That Can Get Your DUI Case DISMISSED!

First, can I ask you a personal question? (… no, this question isn’t one of the 7 Simple Questions I am referring to). My question to YOU is, have you ever wondered how some people are able get their DUI case dismissed or the charges substantially reduced while others are convicted of criminal DUI, thrown in jail and slammed with heavy fines? The answer may be easier than you think…

You probably already know that once you are stopped and suspected of drunk driving a Florida DUI Task Force Officer is called to the stop to do a Florida DUI investigation. During the course of your DUI investigation, the law requires the police to follow certain procedures. If the arresting officer fails to follow any of those procedures, your DUI case will be DISMISSED.

What you may call a “technicality” or “loophole”, is actually the way your DUI lawyer enforces your Constitutional rights. Hollywood DUI lawyer, Richard G. Salzman uses creative and aggressive DUI defense techniques to tear apart even the toughest Florida DUI cases with the highest breath test readings and failing roadside sobriety exercise scores.

Even a Refusal can be successfully challenged!
The following is a list of 7 simple but critical questions that can significantly impact the final outcome of your DUI case:
1. Did the officer warn you that your drivers license would be automatically suspended if you refused to submit to a breath test?
2. Did the officer neglect to inform you that you had the right to a lawyer before performing the roadside sobriety exercises?
3. Did a police officer tell you to “keep blowing” during the breath test?
4. Do you suffer from any injury or illness which may affect your balance?


5. Do you suffer from any illness that may cause you to have slurred speech; excessive sweating; red or watery eyes; restlessness; alcohol-smelling breath (example: Type II Diabetes); extreme fatigue; or light-headedness?
6. Did the arresting officer mistake your nervousness or exhaustion for intoxication?
7. Did the arresting officer neglect to conduct your roadside sobriety exercises on a flat, dry surface that was well-lit? Were your roadsides conducted on the side of the road, close to passing traffic?
7a. BONUS question: Did the DUI Task Force officer fail to observe you for 20 uninterrupted minutes just prior to conducting your breath test?
If you answered “YES” to any of these questions, you owe it to yourself to call me, Hollywood DUI lawyer Richard G. Salzman, for your FREE 30-minute telephone consultation.

Whether it’s your 1st DUI, 2nd DUI, or 3rd DUI… everybody knows that hiring a skilled and aggressive DUI attorney is your ticket to fighting and beating the DUI charges against you! In fact, there are many powerful and effective strategies I can use for fighting and beating your misdemeanor DUI or felony DUI charge, or at least keeping adverse consequences to a minimum.

Don’t let procrastination, hesitation or fear stop you from fighting back! For your free 30-minute initial case evaluation by phone,     call me, Hollywood DUI attorney, Richard G. Salzman, today (855) DUI-GONE (855-384-4663), home of South Florida’s Premier DUI Defense Law Firm.

Let me be your DUI Defense WARRIOR!
We accept All Major Credit Cards.

Law Offices of Richard G. Salzman, P.A.
4340 Sheridan St., Suite 102
Hollywood, FL 33021
(954) 981-0336
(855) DUI-GONE, (855) 384-4663

Top 10 Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Talk to Police!

Top 10 Reasons Why You Should Not Talk with the Police

REASON #1: Talking to the police CANNOT help you. EVER.

If the police are talking to you, it’s because they suspect you have committed a crime. If they have detained you, it’s because they already have enough evidence to arrest you and they want to see if you will admit it and thus, give them an even stronger case against you. If they have evidence to arrest you for a crime, they will. If they don’t, they won’t. It’s as simple as that. Talking to them or not talking to them won’t make a difference! No one has ever “talked his way out of” an arrest. If the police have enough evidence to make an arrest, they will.

If you deny that you committed the crime, they will not believe you. They already have evidence suggesting that you committed the crime. They’ll assume you’re just doing what every criminal does in denying the offense. It will not prevent you from getting arrested. This is completely contrary to popular belief.

For some reason, many people think that they are savvy enough or eloquent enough or well educated enough to be able to talk to the police and convince the police not to arrest them. But ask any police officer if because of the eloquence and convincing story of the suspect, they have ever been convinced not to arrest somebody whom they had originally intended to arrest, and they will tell you no. They will tell you that in their experience, no one has ever talked themselves out of getting arrested. Talking to the police cannot help you. It cannot prevent you from getting arrested. It can only hurt.

REASON #2: Even if you’re guilty, and you want to confess and get it off your chest, you still shouldn’t talk to the police.

There is plenty of time to confess and admit guilt at a later stage of the proceedings. What’s the rush? Always get a lawyer first. Let the lawyer set up a deal whereby you get something in exchange for accepting responsibility for the offense; a better plea bargain, or maybe even immunity. If you confess to the police, you get nothing in return. Zero. In fact, you probably will get a harsher prosecution because the state’s case is now airtight, now that you have confessed.

REASON #3: Even if you are innocent, it’s easy to tell some little white lie in the course of a statement.

This kind of thing happens all the time. A person who is completely innocent and who is vehemently trying to assert their innocence will go overboard and take it a little bit too far and deny some insignificant fact, tell some little white lie, because they want to sound as innocent as possible. But if the police have evidence of that lie, it makes your entire statement look like a lie. The prosecutor will ask: “Why did he lie to the police? Why indeed would he lie to the police, unless he were guilty?”

That little white lie could be used to destroy your credibility at trial.

An example would be a man who is questioned about a murder. He wants to sound innocent. He wants to sound non-violent. He is, in fact, innocent. So he denies everything. He denies the killing. He denies being in the area where the killing occurred on the night that it occurred. He denies owning a gun, and denies that he has ever owned a gun in his whole life. But it turns out that this last statement is not true, And the police can prove it. He did at one time during his life own a gun. Now he has told a lie and the police have caught him and things will only go downhill from there. Although he is innocent of the murder, he has told a lie that will be used to destroy his credibility at trial and could be the cause of his conviction.

REASON #4: Even if you are innocent, and you only tell the truth, and you don’t tell any little white lies, it is possible to give the police some detail of information that can be used to convict you.

For example, a suspect is being questioned about a murder. He is truly innocent of the murder. But in the course of explaining his innocence, he makes the statement that he never liked the victim, because the victim was not a nice guy. A statement like that could be used to prove motive.

Or in the course of the statement, the suspect might admit that he was in the area of town where the murder was committed at the time it was committed. Although he’s innocent and although this statement is true, the prosecutor could use that statement to suggest that the suspect had the opportunity to commit the crime, which looks very bad in front of a jury.

REASON #5: Even if you were innocent, you still should not talk to the police because of the possibility that the police might not recall your statement with 100% accuracy.

What if the police officer remembers something wrong? What if he remembers you said “X” when actually you said “Y”? If the police officer takes the witness stand and contradicts your statements at trial, it will kill your credibility. You can take the witness stand and say “I never said that!” But it’s your word versus a police officer. Who’s the jury going to believe? Who will the jury assume is lying to save his own skin? Who will the jury believe is lying because he’s really guilty? You guessed it. YOU!

REASON #6: Even if you’re innocent, an innocent person can still make some innocent assumption about a fact or state some detail about the case they overheard on the way to the police station, and the police will assume that they only way the suspect could have known that fact or that detail was if he was, in fact, guilty.

Example: Suppose a police officer is questioning a suspect about a homicide. And the suspect makes the statement “I don’t know who killed the victim. I’ve never owned a gun in my life. I don’t even like guns.” On it’s face, there’s nothing incriminating about that statement. But suppose at trial, the prosecutor asks the police officer if anything about that statement surprised him. The police officer answers “Yes, it surprised me when the suspect mentioned a gun, because I had never mentioned a gun before that. I merely told him that I was investigating a homicide.”

When the officer said there has been a homicide, the suspect may have simply assumed that the killing was done with a gun. Or the suspect may have overheard in the police station some other officer talk about the fact that it was a shooting. But if the officer taking the statement had never mentioned a gun or a shooting, and the suspect makes the statement that he had never owned a gun, you give the prosecution the opportunity to create some high drama, suggesting that suspect has had a Freudian slip, and has made a statement about a gun because he is, in fact, the murderer. And as the murderer, he knew that a gun was used.

REASON #7: Even if you’re innocent, a suspect’s answers can still be used against him if the police (through no fault of their own) have any evidence that any of the suspect’s statements are false (even if they are really true).

Suppose the police have a statement from a witness who claims to have seen the suspect in the area where the crime was committed at the time of the incident. Suppose further that this witness is actually wrong, but has made an honest mistake. The suspect then gives a statement to the police in which he says he was nowhere near the area where the crime took place at the time of the incident. By giving the statement, the suspect has now created a conflict between his own statement and the statement of this witness. By itself, the statement of the witness that he or she saw the suspect in the area at the time the crime was committed is not that useful. But by giving this statement, and creating a conflict with this witness’s statement, the suspect has now made this relatively minor witness into the government’s star witness.

The jury will hear the conflict and will assume that the suspect is lying and wonder why.

So even if you tell the complete truth, you’re putting your cards on the table without first seeing what evidence the government has. And some bit of evidence which, through some honest mistake, contradicts part of your story, if the government has you set yourself up to be portrayed as a liar by giving a statement without first knowing what evidence the government has.

REASON #8: The police do not have authority to make deals or grant a suspect leniency in exchange for getting as statement.

People tell me all the time that they gave a statement to the police because the police told them that they would be better off if they confessed, better off if they admitted what they did wrong, better off if they cooperated. The police will make vague statements that things will go easier on the suspect if he simply admits what he did wrong. The police will also make vague statements suggesting that they will do what they can to help the suspect, that they will put in a good word with the prosecutor, if the suspect will just come clean.

Number One thing to remember: The police do not have authority to make deals, grant immunity, or negotiate plea agreements. The only entity with that authority is the State Attorney in state court and the U.S. Attorney in federal court. Despite their claim that they are trying to help you, the only help police are providing when they take your statement is giving you rope with which to hang yourself.

REASON #9: Even if a suspect is guilty, and wants to confess, there may be mitigating factors which justify a lesser charge.

Mitigating factors are rarely brought out by the police in an interview. Normally, police want to focus on the facts that will suggest the suspect has committed the most severe crime possible. In fact, the suspect may have committed a lesser grade of offense. And if given the opportunity to talk to an attorney first, the attorney may be able to explain to the suspect what facts are important in establishing that he is guilty of a lesser grade of an offense, and not a higher grade. A confession presented in this context to the State Attorney’s office might result in a lesser charge and a more appropriate and fair penalty.

REASON #10: Even for a completely honest and innocent person, it is difficult to tell the same story twice in exactly the same way.

If you tell your story one time at trial and you tell the truth and you’re innocent, there’s very little the prosecutor can do by way of cross examination. But if you’ve told your story twice, once at trial, and once previously in a statement to the police, many months apart, the chances are very high that, even if you are telling the truth, some little details in your statement are going to change.

A good cross examiner will pick up on these changes and will relentlessly question you about them in an effort to make it look like you are lying.

So for all these reasons, whether you are guilty or innocent, whether you want to confess or want to exonerate yourself, whether you’re poorly educated or the most eloquent speaker in the world, you should NEVER, EVER, under any circumstances, give a statement to the police when you have been detained as a suspect.

Are you serious about beating the charges against you? If so,           don’t let procrastination, hesitation or fear stop you from fighting back! For your free initial case evaluation by phone, call me today (954) 981-0336. We accept All Major Credit Cards.

I’m Richard G. Salzman, your Criminal Defense WARRIOR!

My goal is Justice, but I’ll settle for VICTORY!

SHOCKING REVELATION: 10 Fatal Myths That Could Land You In Jail!

SHOCKING REVELATION: 10 Fatal Myths That Could Land You In Jail!

Myth #1. “If I’m the subject of a criminal investigation, the police have to tell me everything about the investigation.”

FACT: The police, FBI or other law enforcement officers don’t have to tell you anything. In fact, they are even permitted to lie to you. If you are suspected of a crime, police officers will often mislead you in order to get you to admit things that could implicate you in a crime. 

Myth #2. “I’m not guilty, I didn’t do anything wrong, so it doesn’t matter if I talk to the police.”

FACT: This is a fatal misconception, and could be very harmful to you. I know you want to cooperate, it’s only natural. However, it’s not a good idea to talk to police without your criminal defense lawyer present. Although police will often tell you that it’s better for you to cooperate with them or give them your statement, keep in mind that they are not your friends. Their job is to gather evidence, to get you to “volunteer” information that they can later use as probable cause to arrest you and charge you with a crime. They are not interested in information that will exonerate you or prove your innocence. Speaking to police without your lawyer present can be a dangerous thing to do. Every day you read about innocent individuals who, after serving years in prison for crimes they DID NOT commit, are suddenly found “not guilty” and released! Do not speak to police without your criminal defense lawyer by your side.

Myth #3. “The FBI came and took my computers saying that I was being investigated for a crime. But that was 6 months ago and I haven’t heard from them since. Am I wrong to assume that I’m just “small fry” and they dropped the investigation?”

FACT: You are dead-wrong. You can bet that Law Enforcement does not “drop an investigation” of someone when a crime has been committed. When you are being investigated for a crime and you don’t hear from the police for a while, it doesn’t mean your investigation is over or dropped. Police may be gathering physical evidence against you, they may be interviewing witnesses and taking testimony or they may have you under surveillance. They are building their case against you, they did not drop the investigation and you would be wise to retain a criminal defense lawyer at the earliest stages of your investigation.

Myth #4. “I can always get my conviction expunged so long as the crime was not serious.”

FACT: You cannot expunge a conviction. In fact, if you have been convicted of ANY crime, you are ineligible to have your record sealed or expunged. If the charges against you were dismissed by the court, dropped by the State Attorney or you received a withhold of Adjudication or you were found Not Guilty after a trial you may be eligible for expungement. How long ago you allegedly committed a crime makes no difference. There are certain serious crimes that cannot be expunged.

Myth #5. “If I’m being investigated but haven’t been arrested or charged yet, hiring a criminal defense attorney will make me look guilty.”

FACT: If you are being investigated, they already think you are guilty. If you were arrested by the police, the police think you are guilty. As you may already know, people generally think “he must be guilty if he’s hiring a criminal lawyer to fight for him.” But the truth is hiring an aggressive and competent criminal defense attorney to fight for your rights is the smartest thing you can do when you are the subject of a criminal investigation. Ask yourself this question: if you had a miserable toothache, would you drill your own tooth? Of course not! Retaining an experienced criminal defense WARRIOR at the early stages of a criminal investigation is crucial if you are serious about protecting yourself from a possible criminal conviction and harsh penalties.

Myth #6. “If the police want to speak to me about a crime, I have to talk to them.”

FACT: This is a myth and it is FALSE – a detective calls you and he wants to just ask you some questions, nothing serious. Just a friendly chat. The fact that he just wants to “chat” with you instead of interrogate you doesn’t change a thing. He wants to con you into telling him everything you know. The only thing is… he doesn’t believe a word you say unless you are admitting to committing a crime. The reason he wants to chat with you is because he has some kind of evidence he plans to use against you. Remember – you have the RIGHT to remain silent. Use it! By speaking to police, you may confess to a crime that you didn’t commit, you may admit a fact that makes you appear guilty, you may get caught in a lie, the police may misunderstand you, they may not remember everything you said, they may lie about your statement or change your words around. The police are trained to use certain techniques designed to pull information out of you, information that could seriously harm you. They will use deceit, make false promises, threaten you, etc. Use your 5th Amendment Right to remain silent. Do not speak to the police without your criminal defense WARRIOR present.

Myth #7. “Going with a public defender is the same as hiring a private attorney.”

FACT: Many public defenders are very good lawyers, however they carry heavy caseloads each and every day. The problem with that is that they cannot possibly devote the amount of time, energy and personal attention that your case deserves. Additionally, public defenders do not have the resources your criminal defense lawyer has. PD’s don’t have the time necessary to investigate your case or to do the research necessary to persuade a Judge to give you a lighter sentence or to negotiate a favorable deal with the prosecutor or to prepare adequately for trial. Also, you don’t get to choose your public defender, they are appointed to your case. And the most important fact you should be aware of… who you choose as your criminal defense WARRIOR does make a difference!

Myth #8. “The person who called the police on me, changed their mind and doesn’t want to press charges. So I don’t have to be concerned, the police will drop it.”

FACT: Not necessarily. Just because that person decides to drop charges against you, it does not mean they will be dropped. The “victim” does not control the process. All is not forgiven simply because the victim has a change of heart. The fact that the victim does not want to press charges neither excuses nor negates the original criminal act. If a crime can be proven, the case will be submitted for prosecution. The victim will be forced to testify against you like any other witness, despite any arrangement they may have made with you after the fact. By filing a police report, a victim affirms that a crime has been committed and agrees to cooperate in any subsequent investigation and prosecution. It doesn’t matter if the person who reported you changes their mind and decides not to pursue charges against you, if the crime can be proven, the case will be submitted to the prosecutor.  Once a crime is reported, the police don’t “drop” it.

Myth #9. “I don’t need to hire an attorney yet. I haven’t been charged with anything.”

FACT: This is a fatal error in thinking. The BEST time to hire a criminal defense lawyer is the moment you realize you are under investigation, or the moment you are arrested.  Often your criminal defense lawyer can negotiate an early dismissal before any charges have been filed. If charges have already been filed, hiring your criminal defense lawyer before the arraignment is the next best time; while the prosecutor is talking to its “victims” this is the best time for your lawyer to be talking with the prosecutor during this decision-making period to make sure the prosecutor gets the entire story and not just the police officer’s version of events. Between arraignment and pre-trial conferences or case management is also an acceptable time to hire your criminal defense lawyer, though it is already late in the game since this is the time the prosecutor will be handing over evidence it intends to use in its case against you. If you wait any longer, it may be too late because your lawyer will not have had sufficient time to get discovery and prepare for trial. Don’t let hesitation, fear or procrastination keep you from fighting back! The best time to hire a lawyer is as soon as you realize you are on their radar.

Myth #10. “The police can’t come in and search my place or take my things without a search warrant.”

FACT: There are certain times when police can search your person, place or vehicle and take your things without a warrant.  These are called “exceptions.” For instance, police may search your car or home if you give your consent. Your landlord may not give consent to your apartment being searched but your roommate can give consent. Another instance when a warrant is not required is when contraband is in plain view; in that case police may seize the illegal items without a warrant. Additionally police do not need a warrant if the search is connected to an arrest. Finally, in an emergency situation a search may be done without a warrant.

If You’re 55 or Older, One Drink Can Make You a Dangerous Driver

ATTENTION FLORIDA DRIVERS! If you’re 55 or over, it may be too dangerous for you to drive if you’ve had just one single alcoholic drink.  

In a new study from the University of Florida, Psychologists Sara Jo Nixon and Alfredo Sklar say older drivers are too dangerous to get behind the wheel after drinking just one alcoholic beverage. “No one’s ever looked at the combination of aging drivers and alcohol,” Sklar said recently.

Though many studies show the disastrous effects of heavy drinking and driving, the two researchers say there is scant information available regarding the effects of one drink and then driving — which is more common in the United States, especially as more and more baby-boomers reach retirement age.

The pair devised a driving test along a 3-mile stretch of road and tested two groups of people; those 55 and older and those under 50. Several factors were tested as well as overall driving ability. Monitors were used to record the resulting driving patterns, reaction time, etc.

They found that older drivers scored significantly worse after taking a single drink than they did when completely sober, and significantly worse than their younger counterparts who similarly ingested one single drink.

Expecting to find both groups of drivers impaired after just one drink, Nixon and Sklar were surprised to discover that younger drivers appeared to be unaffected by drinking alcoholic beverages in moderate amounts.

I admit it, I’m over 55 (and not ready for retirement!)… but after reading about their study I realized that it’s been years since I have had even one drink before driving. After all, I’m a criminal defense lawyer, a criminal defense WARRIOR! Over the years I have fought fiercely for hundreds of people who were charged with DUI; many of whom were actually well within the legal limit!

Although I’ve gotten every one of those latter DUI cases dismissed, my DUI clients had to endure the embarrassment of being pulled over and questioned by police, coerced to blow into a Breathalyzer device, intimidated into performing the roadside exercises, humiliated by being arrested and dragged off to jail and after having to hire ME to fight for their rights, they were compelled to appear in court 2-3 times before the case was finally dismissed… And that includes my DUI clients who were all below the legal limit of .08 BrAC.

I’m sure you already know that even if you’re SOBER it can be an ordeal just to defend yourself against being wrongfully charged with DUI.

For me, if I know I’m going to drive, having even just one drink is just not worth the anxiety and effort that follows.

If you’re 55 or older, you may be wise to… THINK BEFORE YOU DRINK!

Richard G. Salzman is a Hollywood DUI defense lawyer, defending your rights since 1986.

(855) DUI-GONE

Who you choose as your criminal defense lawyer DOES make a difference!

Have you ever wondered how some lawyers are able get their client’s criminal case dismissed or the charges reduced in a plea deal while other clients end up settling for terrible plea deals that their lawyers negotiated?

From time to time I will get a phone call from someone whose attorney has already negotiated a plea deal with the prosecutor.  For a variety of reasons – the client is unhappy with the plea agreement their lawyer negotiated for them.  These unhappy clients will call to ask me (a) if I think the deal is good or not, (b) if I would have handled it differently, and (c) if I could do something to “fix it.”  I tell them, like everything in life, “it depends.” 

I know that if you ask two criminal defense attorneys the same question, you will get two different answers.  I also know that hiring a skilled, creative and aggressive criminal defense lawyer is your ticket to fighting the charges against you! Could I have gotten them a better deal by handling their case differently? I’m always confident that I could have!  My confidence notwithstanding, there are some valid reasons why you might not be getting the deal you think that you deserve:

1. The prosecutor assigned to your case – if you get a young or overly ambitious prosecutor looking for a promotion or looking to score political points, they will hold back on offering reduced penalties. Instead they will offer higher penalties at the start of negotiations. Also, in order to reduce a charge to a lesser one, the more junior prosecutors first have to ask a supervisor.  Occasionally, a reasonable prosecutor may want to agree to a reduced charge or sentence – but their supervisor will not approve it.  When that occurs, I make every effort to overcome any resistance by dealing directly with the supervisor. Additionally, the harder I fight for my client (by conducting comprehensive depositions of the State’s witnesses, by filing Motions to Suppress Evidence, etc.) the more likely I can secure a better plea deal. If a case has been on a Judge’s docket for a long time, I know that the Judge wants to “move” the case forward and is more willing to agree to favorable plea terms if I include the Judge in plea negotiations.

2. The Victim:  If a person is the victim of a crime (whether violent crime, financial crime or property crime) that injured victim can have significant impact on the outcome of a case. If the victim is persistent and demands the maximum punishment allowed by law, the prosecutor is likely to push for a very unfavorable plea deal. However, if the victim does not show up at court hearings, or if the victim appears as if they don’t care about the outcome of the case – the prosecutor will be able to offer more generous terms in a plea deal negotiations. 

3. Your prior record, criminal history:  Few criminal defense lawyers can work miracles.  If you have a prior criminal record indicating multiple arrests and multiple convictions, the possibility of getting a favorable plea deal is slim.  For example, if you have committed several minor criminal violations and received withholds of adjudication, it is unlikely you will get a withhold on any new criminal charge.  Although a prior criminal history cannot be erased, there are many powerful and effective strategies for fighting and beating a misdemeanor or felony charge, as well as minimizing the negative impact of a prior criminal record.

Who you choose as your criminal defense lawyer, DOES make a difference!

Two monster WINS in court this week!

AWESOME WEEK in court!! I achieved two huge WINS for my clients:

(1) Client G.K., a Private Investigator and owner of a licensed Florida Private Investigation Agency, was subpoenaed to testify at deposition this week and ordered to turn over sensitive confidential documents to opposing counsel. Because my client is protected under Florida Statute 493.6119 and was not given sufficient time to respond to the subpoena, I filed an Emergency Motion for Protective Order and Motion to Quash Subpoena. One day before the hearing on my Motion, opposing counsel agreed NOT to depose my client and limited their request to one invoice, which my client was happy to provide. An Agreed Order was filed the following day and my client was not required to give testimony at deposition or to produce sensitive and confidential documents.

(2) Client B.G. was charged in two separate cases with being a “Felon in Possession of a Firearm or Ammunition,” a 1st Degree Felony. If convicted, client would up to 60 years in state prison; 30 years for each criminal violation. Just days before a trial date was set and jury selection to begin, the State offered client a SWEET deal; two years prison with credit for 1 year time served, to close out BOTH felony cases. This means client would only have to spend one year in prison. Client gladly accepted State’s offer!

If you’ve been charged with a crime, here’s something you should know…

QUESTION: 1  in 4 Americans has it. And it can change the course of their lives forever. What is it?


In Florida more than 700,000 people, or 1 out of 4 people have criminal records. These criminal records range from charges that were dismissed, to simple misdemeanors, to complex felonies.

You probably already know that when you are convicted of a crime there are harsh penalties attached to your conviction such as possible incarceration or house arrest, parole, supervised release, community service, forfeiture of assets, restitution, court costs and steep fines followed by lengthy probation periods.

What you may not know is that there are indirect or collateral consequences that are triggered as a result your conviction:

  • loss or severe restriction of your professional license (medical, nursing, pharmacist, teaching, accounting);
  • restrictions in occupations, trades, industries and businesses;
  • loss of your voting privileges;
  • loss of firearm and hunting privileges;
  • ineligibility for public funds; student loans, welfare benefits;
  • ineligibility for public employment and doing business with the State;
  • eviction from public housing;
  • restrictions on care, custody and control of your family.

What you also may not know is that there are devastating social consequences of conviction as well, such as:

  • loss of a job; loss of benefits including healthcare insurance
  • social stigma (family, friends and neighbors);
  • denial of housing;
  • denial of employment opportunities;
  • denial of scholarships;
  • conviction as a ground for divorce;
  • negative character evidence, impeachment evidence that can be used against you.

If you are under investigation or have been arrested or charged with a crime your best bet is to hire an attorney who will fight for your rights!

I’m Richard Salzman, your criminal defense WARRIOR. What sets me apart from my colleagues is my creative and aggressive approach to criminal defense. I give my clients more than they expect!

Now, can I ask you a personal question? Have you ever wondered how some people are able get their criminal case dismissed or the charges reduced while others are thrown in jail and slammed with heavy fines? I know you’re worried and probably thinking “what if I go to jail?” It’s no secret, people arrested for criminal violations are terrified that they may be convicted or end up in jail, even if they are innocent.

I also know that hiring a skilled and aggressive criminal defense lawyer is your ticket to fighting the charges against you! Despite what you think, getting arrested for a crime is no longer a hopeless case. In fact, there are many powerful and effective strategies for fighting and beating a misdemeanor or felony criminal charge, or at least keeping adverse consequences to a minimum.
When you think about it…

“Right Now, Can There Be Anything More Important Than Your Freedom?”

Can you trust your freedom to overworked Public Defenders? When you hire Richard G. Salzman, Esq., he will help you understand your rights and fight fiercely to defend you. I am an experienced criminal defense lawyer, licensed in New York and New Jersey since 1986 and in Florida since 1988. My practice is based on the belief that you were arrested when you shouldn’t have been.

   Who you choose as your lawyer DOES make a difference!

Just imagine what it would be like if you could level the playing field in the courtroom… Don’t let procrastination, hesitation or fear stop you from fighting back! Because it’s never wrong to assert your rights!

For your free initial case evaluation, call Richard G. Salzman today (855) DUI-HOME (855-384-4663), home of South Florida’s Premier Criminal Defense Law Firm. We are now accepting All Major Credit Cards.


Richard G. Salzman, Esq.
P.S… Here’s one SECRET the prosecutor does not want you to know: Discussing your case with anyone but your lawyer can be used against you in court. Learn how Richard G. Salzman can help save your freedom, call today 855-DUI-GONE (855-384-4663). All Major Credit Cards accepted.