Practice Areas and Legal Definitions

Drugs and Narcotics Charges:
Drugs and Narcotics laws have tried to keep up with the changing perceptions and real dangers of substance abuse. By 1970, over 55 federal drug laws and countless state laws specified a variety of punitive measures, including life imprisonment and even the death penalty. To clarify the situation, the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 repealed, replaced, or updated all previous federal laws concerned with narcotics and all other dangerous drugs.

Most states have laws that give different treatment to possession of different categories of drugs (i.e. prescription drugs, marijuana, crystal methamphetamine), and also make a distinction in the offense charged as to whether a small amount of the drug was found with the defendant (personal use) or a larger amount (intent to sell or distribute, trafficking). A conviction on a drug charge of any magnitude, even a small amount of marijuana, can seriously affect your present and future employment chances, your education, your reputation and your freedom.

White Collar Crimes:
High-tech professionals, corporate executives and clergy who are criminally charged for offenses such as corporate theft, counterfeiting, embezzlement, forgery, hacking, fraud, tax evasion or bad checks are often referred to as "white collar" offenders and are prosecuted for white collar crimes. In some cases, first-time offenders are convicted and sent to prison, even with no prior criminal history. An arrest and conviction for one of these crimes can have a serious impact on your life.

Fraud:
In criminal law, fraud is the crime or offense of deliberately deceiving another in order to damage them — usually, to obtain property or services from him or her unjustly.  Fraud can be accomplished through the aid of forged objects. In the criminal law of common law jurisdictions it may be called "theft by deception," "larceny by trick," "larceny by fraud and deception" or something similar. Fraud can be committed through many methods including mail, wire, phone and the internet.

Serious Violent Crimes and Murder:
By definition, a violent crime is a behavior by persons, against persons or property that intentionally threatens, attempts or actually inflicts physical harm. The seriousness of the injuries to the victim(s), whether or not guns or other weapons were used and/or whether or not the alleged perpetrator has a criminal record will determine the seriousness of the charge. Most violent crimes are considered felonies and are subject to be considered a "strike" in a state that has adopted three strikes laws. Violent criminal charges can include: aggravated assault, arson, assault and battery, domestic violence, hate crimes, homicide, larceny, rape, manslaughter, mayhem and murder.

One of the most serious areas of violent crime is homicide - killing a person, whether lawfully or unlawfully. Justifiable homicide and excusable homicide are lawful homicides, while criminal homicide, negligent homicide, reckless homicide and vehicular homicide are unlawful homicides. Unlawful homicide comprises the two crimes of murder and manslaughter.

Domestic Violence:
Domestic violence is any physical, emotional, sexual or other violence that takes place between people who may be married or not married; heterosexual, gay, or lesbian; living together, separated or dating. Domestic violence can be criminal and include physical assault: hitting, pushing and shoving, etc., sexual abuse: unwanted or forced sexual activity, and stalking. Domestic violence charges can have a serious impact on your life.

Felony Crimes:
Felony Crimes involve drug and narcotics charges, arson, burglary, armed robbery, murder and/or attempted murder, rape and/or sexual assault, kidnapping and aggravated assault and battery. A felony conviction is a serious matter that can result in a substantial state prison sentence and the potential loss of certain privileges and Constitutional rights of U.S. citizenship, such as the right to possess a firearm or the right to vote.

Misdemeanors:
Misdemeanors are more serious than petty offenses, but much less serious than felonies. Misdemeanors typically result in imposition of such punishments as a fine or a jail sentence not exceeding a year. If a jail sentence is imposed, it is served at a local, city or county jail rather than a state or federal prison (penitentiary). In many jurisdictions and in certain types of cases defendants who can't afford an attorney are not entitled to a court-appointed attorney in a misdemeanor case. Unlike felonies, misdemeanors are usually handled by special courts with abbreviated procedures, such as a city court or municipal court.

DUI/Driving Under the Influence:
"DUI" stands for Driving under the Influence and occurs when someone is operating, or is in actual physical control, of a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or other controlled substance to the extent that their mental faculties are impaired and/or their blood alcohol content (BAC) is above the legal limit. Even for a first offense, penalties can include license suspension, substantial fines, community service, mandatory attendance at a state or DMV approved alcohol program, mandatory overnight incarceration and the required installation (at the offender's expense) of a car ignition locking device. In addition, a DUI conviction stays on a DMV record for several years, it typically results in higher insurance premiums, and an offender may become ineligible for credit.  Plus, a DUI could also jeopardize your employment opportunities.

However, if someone was injured as a result of the drunken driving accident, it is possible the defendant will be charged with a felony (and if the victim dies, the driver may be charged with vehicular manslaughter). Further, a DUI conviction will likely be raised to a felony if it is the driver's fourth DUI offense or the driver has had a prior felony DUI offense within 10 years of the new charge.

Burglary and Robbery:
Burglary is defined as the unlawful entering of a building with intent to commit a felony or to steal valuable property.  Robbery is also a specific intent crime, requiring both theft and a form of violence or threat of violence used to deprive someone of their property.  A common example of a robbery is a convenience store holdup, wherein a robber threatens to shoot a cashier unless the cashier hands over money.

Forgery:
Forgery is defined as a false signature, written document or material alteration made with intent to defraud. Documents that can be the object of forgery include contracts, identification cards, and legal certificates.

Internet Crime:
Internet crime is defined as any illegal activity involving one or more components of the Internet such as websites, chat rooms and/or email. Internet crime involves the use of the Internet to communicate false or fraudulent representations to consumers. These crimes may include, but are not limited to, advance-fee schemes, non-delivery of goods or services, computer hacking, phishing, pharming, programming worms, viruses or employment/business opportunity schemes.

Sex Crimes:
Sex crimes can include such charges as: Child Abuse, Child Pornography, Date Rape, Failure to register (as a Sex Offender), Indecent Exposure, Internet Porn, Lewd Conduct, Marital Rape, Molestation, Obscenity, Pedophilia, Pornography, Prostitution, Rape, Sexual Abuse, Sexual Assault, Sodomy and Statutory Rape. Many sex crimes are considered felonies and require convicted defendants to continually register themselves as publicly recognized sex offenders with the local and state authorities where they live and work. Charges of sexual misconduct carry extremely serious penalties and these crimes are commonly punished more severely than any other crime except murder. Sexual misconduct is seldom witnessed by anyone other than the accuser and accused and the risk of conviction of an innocent person is drastically higher in these cases.

Juvenile Delinquency:
Delinquency is a legal term for criminal behavior carried out by a juvenile. Delinquent behavior is divided into two categories: status offenses and delinquency offenses. Status offenses are those acts which would not be considered offenses if committed by an adult, such as school truancy, running away from home, alcohol possession or use, or curfew violations. Juvenile Delinquency offenses involve destruction or theft of property, commission of violent crimes against persons, illegal weapon possession, or the possession or sale of illegal drugs.

Juvenile Court:
Juvenile court is unique and should not be treated as if it were adult court for young clients.  While the substantive criminal law is the same in juvenile and adult court, the procedures and sentencing law are substantially different.  The consequences of a misstep by an attorney inexperienced in juvenile matters can be devastating. For example, contrary to what many parents believe, a juvenile conviction is not removed from a child's record when he or she turns 18.

Despite the rehabilitative focus of juvenile court, juvenile convictions are counted as criminal history in future cases. They also remain on state criminal records databases and may affect a young person's ability to enter college, obtain employment, financial aid, a driver's license or join the military. Additionally, juvenile convictions can result in commitment to a juvenile detention facility or institution for periods ranging from days to months and even years. Worse, in some cases, a child may end up being prosecuted in adult court where the punishment is even more severe.

Expungement Motions:
An Expungement of your record results in the extraction and isolation of all records on file with any court correctional facility or law enforcement agency. The records that are expunged include complaints, warrants, arrests reports, commitments, criminal history records, fingerprints and your rap sheet.

Contrary to popular belief, your record is not automatically cleared or expunged with the passage of time. Even if you were never found guilty, an arrest is not expunged unless a court grants your Expungement petition. State statutes impose application guidelines and waiting periods for various types of arrests and convictions. The guidelines provide instruction for what can be expunged and set forth certain specific types of offenses that cannot. The guidelines also impose waiting periods that are calculated from the completion of the sentence imposed by the court.

It is important to note that an Expungement does not destroy records; it extracts and isolates the records. Under most circumstances, once an Expungement has been granted those records cannot be disclosed. A person who has been granted an Expungement can respond that he or she has no conviction when asked a question about having a criminal record. Exceptions to this rule include a person seeking a second Expungement, a person seeking a conditional discharge, and a person seeking to obtain employment in law enforcement.

What to bring to a consultation:

• A copy of all papers pertaining to your arrest(s);
• A copy of all court papers pertaining to the disposition of the charge(s) you want expunged; and,
• A copy of any report pertaining to the completion of any probationary or diversionary treatment program.

Appellate and Post Conviction:
In an appeal, an appellate court reviews the record of the pre-trial and trial proceedings for legal errors. The record includes the court file, the court reporter's transcript and the evidence and exhibits introduced in the trial court. In general, an appellate court does not consider information that is not contained in the record.

A post-conviction petition is the general name for what is called a "collateral attack" on a conviction. In federal court, they are called habeas corpus petitions. By using a post-conviction petition, a defendant generally can bring evidence before the reviewing court that was not part of the record on appeal, and in this way raise issues that would otherwise not be reviewed.

If you or someone you know in South Florida needs the assistance of an experienced Ft. Lauderdale Criminal Defense Attorney, call Entin and Della Fera, P.A. today at 866-435-1605, or complete the contact form provided on this site to schedule your free consultation.

Professional Profiles

If you or someone you know in South Florida needs the assistance of an experienced Ft. Lauderdale Criminal Defense Attorney, call Entin and Della Fera, P.A. today at 866-435-1605, or complete the contact form provided on this site to schedule your free consultation.

ADDRESS OF THE FIRM:
Entin and Della Fera, P.A.
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1970
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: 866-435-1605
Fax: 954-764-2443

MEMBERS OF THE FIRM:

Alvin E. Entin
Mr. Entin, born in Brooklyn, New York, came to Florida for law school in 1967 and never looked back.  With a degree in Government from American University in Washington (B.A. 1967), he attended and graduated from the University of Miami School of Law (J.D. 1970).  While at the University of Miami, Mr. Entin won the Phillip C. Jessup International Moot Court Championship by leading the team in the Regional and International competition (1969 and 1970).  Mr. Entin was selected as the outstanding speaker in the competition, as well as author of the Best Memorial (Brief).  Mr. Entin was a member of Delta Sigma Rho, Tau Kappa Alpha, Delta Theta Phi Law Fraternity, and a Forensic Honorary (1966).  He was also listed in Who’s Who Among Students in American Colleges and Universities (1967). 

Since admission to the Florida Bar in 1970, Mr. Entin has  practiced both criminal and civil litigation in both State and Federal Courts.  In 1976 and through 1978, Mr. Entin was a Member of the Board of Directors for the Florida Criminal Defense Attorneys Association.  In 1978, he authored  “The Law of Mobile Homes in Florida” a Landlord -Tenant CLE Booklet and became an Associate Judge-Mediator for the City of North Miami-Beach, People’s Justice Court. In 1980, he authored “Trial Tactics in Multi-Defendant Cases” for the South Carolina Bar.  He was a Member of the Board of Directors for the North Dade Bar Association (1979-1980, 1983-1984) and the Federal Bar Association (1995-1996).  From 1980-1985, he was a Member of the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers. 

Mr. Entin has appeared in criminal matters throughout the continental United States as well as in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands.  Mr. Entin has enjoyed a reputation as one of the nation’s preeminent criminal defense lawyers.  As a result of his appearance in numerous high profile matters, Mr. Entin, his cases and career have been mentioned in books such as “Flowers for Mrs. Luskin” and “Courting Justice”, as well as film documentaries such as “The Life and Death of Death Row Records”.

Mr. Entin developed his national reputation as a trial lawyer through a long list of acquittals in significant cases.  Some of Mr. Entin’s most significant cases include the acquittal of his defendants in the popularly known “Bubba Bust” case in Key West, Florida.  Mr. Entin’s cross-examination of the principal witness in that case was instrumental in the jury verdicts in favor of Fire Lieutenant Fleita and Mr. Leon Edwards.  Mr. Entin also represented the only acquitted defendant in the federal government’s four year prosecution of the “Moscow Posse”.  In a case where the death penalty was sought against several Defendants, Mr. Entin’s client was released after a jury verdict.

Mr. Entin has secured favorable results in state court as well.  He has succeeded in gaining acquittal for violent crimes as well as those charging political corruption.  The stunning, fast (40 minute deliberation), not guilty verdict in the first degree murder prosecution of Dr. Fred Kaytes is but one of numerous acquittals that has been obtained by Mr. Entin for his state court clients.  His defense of City of Miami Code Enforcement Commissioner and former State Representative, Eladio Armesto, was one of the few exonerations of public officials charged by the State Attorney’s Office.  In fact, Mr. Entin’s reputation has caused him to be hired as a member of the Defense teams in the Barry Minkow ZZZZ Best case, the Snoop Doggy Dogg murder case, and the Mario Fortunato murder case in New York.

Mr. Entin’s excellence as a criminal defense attorney has been consistently recognized by his peers.  Mr. Entin has received Martindale-Hubbell’s highest rating (AV) every year since 1980.  Martindale Hubbell has also recognized Mr. Entin as Pre-Eminent Criminal Defense Counsel in its Bar Register of Pre-Eminent Lawyers.  Mr. Entin has also been included in several editions of “Who’s Who in American Law”. 

Mr. Entin has an equally impressive resume of public and civic service which is so vital to having effective ethos as a lawyer.  Mr. Entin has been Chairman of the Board of Pembroke Pines Theater of Performing Arts for more then 10 years.  His service to the theater and the respect he has drawn from other critics and professionals in that discipline has led to his appointment as a judge for the Carbonnell Awards, South Florida’s version of Broadway’s Tony Awards.  Mr. Entin has acted and starred in numerous roles for many of South Florida’s community theaters.  Mr. Entin is also a past President of Beth Torah Adath Yeshuran Congregation and has served at various times on the Board of Directors of the Greater Miami Jewish Federation, the David Posnack J.C.C., the Aventura - North Miami Beach Lions Club (Past President), Boys Town Jerusalem, Grand Palms Community Association, American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, and the Republican Jewish Committee. 

Mr. Entin has been counsel to both the Dade County and Broward County Republican Executive Committees and has been active in those venues for more than 25 years.  As a result of Mr. Entin’s long history of civic and public service he was appointed to the Florida State Boxing Commission in 1998, and served on that Commission until 2006.  Mr. Entin was elected Chairman of the Commission twice.


Richard R. Della Fera
Richard R. Della Fera was born in Wilmington, Delaware, November 19, 1963.  He received his undergraduate degree from Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.  (B.A., Classical Guitar, 1985), and went on to attend the St. Thomas University School of Law in Miami, Florida on an academic scholarship.  While in law school, Mr. Della Fera was appointed Senior Article Editor for the St. Thomas University Law Review, was named in “Who’s Who of American Law Students”, and was elected to membership in the honorary law fraternity, Phi Delta Phi.  He was also a member of the law school’s Moot Court Board.  Mr. Della Fera graduated cum laude, in the top 5% of his graduating class (J.D., 1995).

Following his admission to practice law in 1995, Mr. Della Fera rapidly established himself as an effective trial and appellate attorney in both criminal and civil practice.  In 1996, he prevailed in his first civil trial in the case of Simmons v. Tucker, involving the misappropriation of an elderly woman’s life savings by her niece.  Mr. Della Fera convinced the jury that the niece was not entitled to the funds and was able to recover the money for his client.

In his first appeal, Mr. Della Fera prevailed in the case of Abreau v. Cobb, 670 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).  Mr. Della Fera obtained a reversal of the lower court’s ruling regarding a complex election law issue involving a recall petition of Miami-Dade County Commissioner Maurice Ferre.  Most notable in this matter is the fact that Mr. Della Fera’s opposing counsel  was Raoul G. Cantero, now a Justice on the Florida Supreme Court.

Mr. Della Fera is also established as a top-flight criminal trial and appellate litigator as well.  In the case of United States v. Burgos, 256 F.3d 1284 (11th Cir. 2001), Mr. Della Fera argued before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia on behalf of a young mother who received the maximum guideline sentence because she refused to give information regarding her husband.  Mr. Della Fera convinced the Court that his client’s sentence was illegally imposed by the sentencing judge.  This case is notable, as it was highlighted at a national criminal law seminar as one of a fraction of cases which will have a positive, long-lasting effect for all criminal defendants in the years to come.

Mr. Della Fera’s federal criminal appellate work is not limited to the Eleventh Circuit, which encompasses Florida, Georgia and Alabama.  For example, Mr. Della Fera argued the case of United States v. Richard Hodge, 321 F.3d 429 (3d Cir. 2003), before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.  In that case, the defendant was charged in federal court with possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance analogue.  The government had argued that the defendant’s sale of candle wax to an undercover officer claiming it to be crack cocaine was a violation of the statute prohibiting the sale of controlled substance analogue.  The client was convicted at trial and sentenced to eleven years imprisonment.  Mr. Della Fera was able to show the Third Circuit on appeal that the legislative history of the statute clearly did not evidence an intent of Congress to criminalize counterfeit substances through the controlled substance analogue statute, a statute meant to criminalize the sale of so-called “designer drugs.”  Mr. Della Fera obtained not only the freedom of his client but the restoration of his civil rights.

Mr. Della Fera has also won hard-fought battles against the government on issues of forfeiture of property as well.  In United States v. Pease, 331 F.3d 809 (11th Cir. 2003), Mr. Della Fera represented the family of a convicted defendant who had their property seized.  Mr. Della Fera argued to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida that the procedures followed by the Government were unlawful and, as a result, his clients were entitled to a return of their property.  After the district court ruled against Mr. Della Fera’s clients, he sought an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit.  In its opinion, the Eleventh Circuit agreed with Mr. Della Fera, that the government had not perfected its forfeiture against the innocent third party family members.  Mr. Della Fera was thus able to win the return of numerous vehicles and other property for his clients.

In addition to appeals, Mr. Della Fera has also successfully fought the government at trial.  In one case, the government charged twelve individuals in federal court in Miami, Florida with racketeering for their alleged roles in a tourist robbery ring.  Mr. Della Fera represented Orenthal “O.J.” Smith, one of the so-called “Miami 12."  Smith was charged with numerous robberies as well as an armed carjacking.  The case received extensive news coverage as Miami had numerous highly-publicized tourist robberies for years prior to the filing of the government’s indictment.  The trial lasted four and a half months during which Mr. Della Fera uncovered evidence to show that a fingerprint found in the car that was the subject of the armed carjacking belonged to another individual who was, at that time, serving a state prison sentence for another armed carjacking.  This was a crack in the government’s case that shed doubt on the entire prosecution.  After two months of jury deliberations, the government was unsuccessful in obtaining a single conviction. 

Mr. Della Fera is also a highly respected attorney for his skills in state court.  In one case, Mr. Della Fera represented a former heavy weight boxer accused of sexually assaulting his step-daughter.  The State believed that its case was “open and shut” because the defendant “confessed” on videotape at the police station.  Mr. Della Fera successfully discredited the alleged confession before the jury.  The defendant was found not guilty of sexual assault and thus avoided the stigma of not only a felony conviction but a designation as a sexual predator which could have resulted in his involuntary civil commitment for an indefinite period of time.   

Mr. Della Fera is committed to insuring that persons accused of crimes are entitled to fairness and due process.  In Anderson v. State, 786 So.2d 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), Mr. Della Fera took on the case of an individual who was denied the ability to present an expert witness at his trial.  Mr. Della Fera successfully argued to the Fourth District Court of Appeals for the State of Florida, which found that the defendant was denied his constitutional rights.  The conviction was reversed.

Mr. Della Fera has also been successful in the area of prisoner’s rights litigation.  Mr. Della Fera was able to reverse the dismissal of a civil rights complaint on behalf of an incarcerated individual. Troville v. Venz, 303 F.3d 1256 (2002).  This individual had his complaint summarily dismissed by a federal judge.  Mr. Della Fera appealed the ruling, believing that the prisoner had a right to his day in court.  Mr. Della Fera passionately argued the prisoner’s case to the court of appeals.  In a unanimous decision, the court found that the prisoner was indeed entitled to pursue his case, and that the judge’s summary dismissal of the complaint was in error.

Mr. Della Fera’s pursuit of involvement with and service to the community is not limited to the courtroom.  Mr. Della Fera is active in civic affairs and has served as counsel to homeowners’ associations in Broward County, Florida.  Mr. Della Fera has appeared before zoning boards on behalf of homeowners who are unprepared and unable to speak for themselves.  Mr. Della Fera believes that the old adage, “you can’t fight city hall,” is a myth, and that with the proper preparation and passion even, the meekest among us can achieve positive results.  Mr. Della Fera is not afraid to stand up to the government in any forum.   His countless successes attest to that.  Mr. Della Fera also maintains active involvement with his musical roots, playing locally in South Florida with his classic rock band, “Fifth Circuit”.


Laura J. Berlowe-Heinish
Ms. Berlowe Heinish is a native of Miami, Florida.  She attended the prestigious Performing and Visual Arts Center, now known as the New World School of the Arts, for high school, and was accepted one and one-half years early into the University of Miami School of Music Vocal Performance degree program.  In addition to attending the school on scholarship, she was elected to membership in Sigma Alpha Iota, the University of Miami’s honorary music fraternity.  Due to her excellence in opera performance, she earned one of only six roles, Despina, in the school’s full orchestral production of Mozart’s “Cosi Fan Tutti” for her senior year.  Ms. Berlowe-Heinish was also privileged to obtain entry by audition into a prestigious summer training program, where she received personal instruction from Metropolitan Opera performers Eleanor Steber and Mignon Dunn.  Although Ms. Berlowe-Heinish was then accepted into the prestigious Manus Conservatory in New York in 1988, she elected to pursue a different route. 

Ms. Berlowe-Heinish went on to earn a Master of Science in Mental Health Counseling from Nova University.  During that time, she completed two internships at the Academy for Community Education in Coral Gables, then one of a handful of alternative schools for at-risk junior high and high school students.  She simultaneously managed the Miami Chamber Symphony in Coral Gables and was awarded as the most active new member of the Coconut Grove Junior Chamber of Commerce.  After earning her Master’s degree, Ms. Berlowe-Heinish decided to attend law school with the hope of specializing in family law. 

Ms. Berlowe-Heinish was accepted to the University of Miami School of Law in 1994.  While there she was earned membership to the Entertainment and Sports Law Review and earned the book award for Civil and Political Rights.  Moreover, she was elected to membership in the honorary legal fraternity, Phi Delta Phi.  During law school, Ms. Berlowe-Heinish was accepted as an intern for the Department of Veterans Affairs Tort Division in Washington, D.C. and accepted as a law clerk in Miami Dade Criminal Circuit Court for the Honorable Alan Gold, now a judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.  During her clerkship, Ms. Berlowe-Heinish was instrumental in providing research for Judge Gold’s opinion in the high profile case of Dieter Reichmann, a German tourist who plotted to kill his girlfriend and attempt to make it appear as one of part of a rash of tourist robberies that were occurring in Miami at the time.  Ms. Berlowe-Heinish graduated from the University of Miami School of Law cum laude in 1997.  She began practicing as an associate in family, appellate, and general civil law with the Law Office of Guillermo F. Mascaro, P.A. immediately upon graduation.  Ms. Berlowe-Heinish began working for Entin, Margules & Della Fera, P.A. in 2000, and continues to work for the newly formed Entin & Della Fera, P.A. today. 

Ms. Berlowe-Heinish’s published opinions include Amador v. Amador, 728 So.2d 1209 (3rd DCA 1999); In re Marriage of Punales, 2004 WL 1058192 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); In re One Hundred Fifty-Hine Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty-One Dollars v. Office of the A.G. (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), and Garcia v. Still, 743 So.2d 522 (Fla. 3rd DCA).   She was admitted to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida in 2001.