While more and more airplane passengers are witnessing bad behavior on flights, most people would still be surprised to see their pilot get escorted off a plane by airport police. For some passengers headed to Florida from New York on March 2, 2022, they witnessed the odd sight.

Their pilot was escorted off the plane for being under the influence of alcohol.

Pulled from the Plane Before Take Off

An early morning flight leaving Buffalo, New York, heading to Ft. Laduerdale, Florida, was delayed when the pilot needed to be removed.

Just before take-off, airport police officers brought a portable breathalyzer test into the cockpit and asked the pilot to take the test.

According to a statement from Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA), there was reason to believe the pilot was under the influence. While the pilot was going through security, “a TSA officer noticed that he may have been impaired.” The agent notified NFTA authorities who approached the pilot and gave him a breathalyzer.

The result revealed that the pilot had a blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.17.  

In New York, the legal BAC for driving is 0.08. The pilot was more than double the legal driving BAC limit of the state. But, pilots do not abide by state laws for driving under the influence. They have their own set of standards for alcohol.

Federal regulations say that pilots are not allowed to fly planes if they have a BAC of 0.04 or higher. Pilots are also prohibited from having consumed alcohol within the eight hours leading up to a flight.

Upon the results of the breathalyzer, the pilot, James Clifton, 52 of Orlando, was immediately removed from the plane and taken into custody by NFTA police.

Related: If You’re Arrested for a Crime, Immediately Take These 6 Steps

Did the Pilot Break the Law?

Clifton has not delivered a statement about the incident, although according to TSA spokeswoman Helen Tederous, Clifton told authorities he had between seven and eight drinks the night before the early morning flight, as reported by PEOPLE.

Clifton had a BAC over the legal limit for pilots. He is said to have had drinks the night before the morning flight, but it has not been determined if it was eight hours before the flight. According to reporting by the Tampa Bay Times, Clifton’s co-pilot said he had dinner with Clifton the night before the flight. Clifton remained at the restaurant after his co-pilot left.

NFTA removed Clifton from the plane, notified the federal authorities, and released him to JetBlue security personnel.

The airplane took off four hours later with a new pilot.

Related: What to Expect From a First Offense DUI

What Will Happen to the Pilot?

In a statement, Derek Dombrowski, a JetBlue spokesperson said, “The safety of JetBlue’s customers and crewmembers is our first priority. We adhere to all DOT rules and requirements concerning alcohol at all times and have a very strict zero tolerance internal alcohol policy.”

“We are aware of the incident that occurred in Buffalo Wednesday and are cooperating fully with law enforcement. We are also conducting our own internal investigation. The crew member involved has been removed from his duties,” the spokesperson continued.

In addition to being the subject of JetBlue’s investigation, Clifton will also be investigated by federal authorities.

TSA spokesperson Tederous said Clifton may face federal charges.

While it’s unclear at this time what charges Clifton may face, there could be a DUI equivalent. There could be other charges related to recklessness or endangerment or even potentially crimes related to attempt.

In 2002, two pilots faced serious consequences after they were stopped just minutes before taking off from Miami International Airport and found to have BAC levels over 0.08.

The men were charged with operating an aircraft under the influence and operating a motor vehicle under the influence. Three years later, both men lost their commercial pilot licenses. One man was sentenced to 2 ½ years in prison and the other to 5 years in prison, as reported by the South Florida Sun Sentinel.

Talk to a DUI Attorney Today

No matter what type of vehicle you’re driving, getting a DUI is a serious matter.

If you have been arrested for a DUI, it’s important to talk to a DUI attorney right away. If you need advice after a DUI or a DUID, talk to attorney TJ Grimaldi today. Schedule your consultation or call 813-226-1023.

As the trial against Curtis Reeves enters its third week, many witnesses have already taken the stand to share what they saw on the day Reeves shot and killed Chad Oulson in a Pasco County movie theater.

There is no denying that Reeves, a retired Tampa police captain, is the person who shot Oulson in the chest, fatally wounding him and injuring Oulson’s wife who was standing next to him. All witnesses agree on this fact. The differences come in the depiction of what led up to the shooting.

Theater Witnesses Share Their Stories

The prosecution called witnesses to share their experience of the day the shooting occurred, which was more than eight years ago.

In most cases, the witnesses shared the same story. They saw Curtis Reeves and Chad Oulson exchange words. They saw Oulson stand up and turn around to face Reeves, who was sitting in the row behind the Oulsons. Then, they heard a loud bang.

Some recalled seeing popcorn fly in the air before the bang. But, witnesses also testified that they didn’t see Oulson raise a fist, throw his phone, or attempt to hit Reeves.

Reeves’ defense team argues that Reeves shot Oulson because he feared for his life. They said Oulson threw his phone at Reeves and appeared ready to hit Reeves. But even as Reeves’ own wife took the stand, she said she didn’t see a punch or a cell phone thrown.

Related: Witnesses Take the Stand in Movie Theater Shooting Case, Including Chad Oulson’s Widow   

Shooter’s Family Takes the Stand

On Monday, February 21, 2022, Curtis Reeves’ wife, Vivian Reeves took the stand to share what she saw while sitting next to her husband in the movie theater that day.

Her story aligns with much of what other witnesses from the theater said. There was an altercation. Oulson stood up, turned around to face Curtis Reeves, and was shot.

Vivian Reeves’ story does include more detail about what she heard from Oulson. She said she heard Oulson use “foul and ugly language” when Curtis Reeves asked him to turn off his phone. The incident began when Curtis Reeves told Oulson to stop using his phone. Oulson was texting his daughter’s child care to check on her as the movie previews played.

Vivian Reeves says she was “terrified” during the encounter, but she says she didn’t see Oulson attempt to punch her husband or throw a phone at him.

Vivian Reeves’ testimony comes after Reeves’ two adult children took the stand last week.

Matthew Reeves, Reeves’ son who is also a police officer, was at the scene moments after his father shot Oulson. He was meeting his parents for the midday movie. He walked in during the middle of the confrontation and heard the gunshot. He testified that he moved to Oulson and immediately began to put pressure on his wound.

Reeves’ daughter, Jennifer Shaw, also took the stand. Shaw wasn’t there on the day of the shooting, but she testified that her father had begun to slow down as he experienced health issues leading up to the shooting. Her testimony seemed to be designed to paint Curtis Reeves as weakening as he aged, although Reeves had been on a hunting trip just days before the shooting.

Related: Movie Theater “Stand Your Ground” Case To Finally Start Trial 8 Years Later

Seeking Justice for the Oulson Family

TJ Grimaldi has been standing with Chad Oulson’s wife, Nicole, throughout the trial and the last eight years leading up to the state’s prosecution of Curtis Reeves.

He recently spoke with Morning in America about his views on the trial so far and what he hopes to see as a just outcome for the Oulson family.

Grimaldi says that due to Curtis Reeves’ experience as a chief of police, he should have been able to manage the argument with Oulson without it resulting in a shooting.

“He should know how to deescalate a situation instead of making one worse,” Grimaldi says.

Grimaldi is also frustrated the case took so long to make it to trial. “The defense team from day one realized that any time in prison was basically a life sentence or death sentence for this gentleman because of his age. They’ve done everything in their power to delay this case from day one,’ he says.

Now, Grimaldi hopes and believes the jury will get the verdict right. In fact, he thinks the jury must get it right, not just for the Oulson family but for society as a whole.

When considering if the case could end in a not guilty verdict, Grimaldi said, “They have to make sure they get this right. It could set some very terrible precedent.”

Related: Dealing With the Media During a High-Profile Case: What to Expect

What’s Next for the Reeves Case?

The trial of Curtis Reeves is expected to last another week. It is unclear at this time if Reeves will take the stand. Reeves is facing charges of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon and second-degree murder. If he is found guilty on both charges, he faces a potential sentence of life in prison.

If you or someone you know is involved in a legal matter, contact the offices of TJ Grimaldi. Talk directly with TJ about how he and his team can help you get the justice you deserve. Request an appointment or call 813-226-1023 today.

More than eight years after a trip to the movie theater led to the death of Chad Oulson, the man who shot and killed Oulson is finally going to see his day in court.

Jury selection has finally begun in the Curtis Reeves case.

What Led to the Trial?

On January 13, 2014, Chad Oulson and his wife, Nicole went to a movie at Grove 16 theater in Wesley Chapel, Florida. Behind them sat retired Tampa police captain, Curtis Reeves and his wife, Vivian.

During the previews, Chad Oulson used his phone to text his daughter’s daycare. This activity annoyed Curtis Reeves, who went to complain to theater staff. Upon his return to the theater, Reeves and Oulson exchanged words. Oulson threw popcorn on Reeves. Reeves pulled out a gun and fired a shot that wounded Nicole Oulson and killed Chad Oulson.

For eight years, Reeves has avoided going to trial for the shooting.

Reeves and his legal team tried to dismiss the case, arguing that it fell under Florida’s stand your ground law. The motion was denied, but it led to appeals, which pushed the case to the  2nd District Court of Appeal. Changing laws caused the case to be delayed further as legal teams waited for a Florida Supreme Court decision regarding rules on burden of proof in stand your ground cases.

All efforts to dismiss the case were denied, and the case is now ready to go to trial — but it took eight years which can lead to some challenges.

Related: Movie Theater “Stand Your Ground” Case To Finally Start Trial 8 Years Later

The Challenge with Jury Selection

In the eight years since Reeves shot and killed Oulson in a Florida movie theater, it’s been difficult to avoid the story in the news. The many appeals, controversial nature of the case, and long timeline have made it a top news story, even gaining national media attention.

The public exposure can make jury selection in the case difficult.

For the case, 250 East Pasco residents were summoned for jury duty. They will be broken into groups of 50 who will be seen over five days of jury selection.

The first day of jury selection, which took place on February 7, 2022, was an indicator that finding an impartial jury could be difficult. When asked if they knew about the case, most jurors raised their hand, according to reporting by the Tampa Bay Times.

During questioning of the first ten jurors, one said, ”I just feel like he shot a guy, and if you kill someone, that’s murder. He’s already guilty.” The juror was dismissed.

Eight of the next nine jurors gave answers that were similar. When jurors are familiar with a case before the trial begins, the judge must question them to determine if they are unbiased and able to serve on the jury.

From the 250 potential jurors, the case will need six jurors who the court believes can hear the case and make a fair judgment based on what they hear in court, not what they hear in the news.

Related: Dealing With the Media During a High-Profile Case: What to Expect

What’s at Stake?

When the six jurors are selected, they will sit for a trial which is expected to take three weeks.

They will decide if Reeves is guilty of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon and second-degree murder.

If found guilty, the 79-year-old Reeves faces life in prison.

Aggravated battery with a deadly weapon is a third-degree felony in Florida. It carries a potential penalty of up to five years in prison or five years probation and a $5,000 fine. When a firearm is discharged, as it was in this case, the penalties can increase to up to 20 years in prison.

Second-degree murder is a first-degree felony in Florida. It carries a potential penalty of life in prison, life on probation, and a $10,000 fine. Under Florida’s 10-20-Life law, a person may be sentenced to a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years in prison if a firearm is used to commit second-degree murder.

Related: Get Good Legal Representation by Asking This One Question

Pushing for a Fair Trial and Justice

TJ Grimaldi is standing by the side of Chad Oulson’s wife, Nicole to see that the trial is fair and leads to the maximum punishment for Reeves.

While the state is prosecuting the criminal case, Grimaldi is representing Nicole Oulson to ensure that justice is found for her husband and the father of her daughter.

“Curtis Reeves should have de-escalated the situation. But instead, all he did was make things worse, and continue to make things worse, even after leaving the theater and coming back when it was basically done and decided to shoot someone over popcorn,” Grimaldi says.

Protect Yourself in a Public Case

Cases that take place in the courtroom and the court of public opinion come with unique challenges. If you are involved with a case that has drawn public interest, work with an attorney who has experience with high-profile cases and knows how to manage the media and legal process through your public case.

Talk to TJ Grimaldi to see how he can use his experience to protect you during a high-profile legal case. Request an appointment or call 813-226-1023 today.

Fracisco Galvan was in the line of fire when two men started shooting at his car. The shots hit him and his two passengers, fatally wounding one of them. Galvan lived through the experience but now, he faces murder charges for the passenger who was killed by the shots.

How did Galvan go from being at risk of being murdered to being charged with third degree murder?

Shots Fired

On January 7, 2022, Fracisco Galvan, 20, got in his car with two others and drove to an apartment complex in Temple Terrace to sell marijuana to an interested buyer. But, the transaction never occurred.

When Galvan’s car pulled up to the apartment, the would-be buyers started shooting at it. The shots hit Galvan and his two passengers. Galvan drove the three injured men to Tampa General Hospital, but it was too late for 18-year-old Ismael Reyers-Barajas. He died from his injuries that day, as reported by the Tampa Bay Times.

While it is unclear if the person or persons who shot Reyers-Barajas and his passengers have been charged, someone is facing criminal charges in the case — Galvan.

In an unusual turn of events, Galvan is now facing a third-degree murder charge for Reyers-Barajas’ death.

Prosecutors say that because the shooting happened during an attempted drug deal orchestrated by Galvan, Galvan is partially to blame for Reyers-Barajas death.

Related: If You’re Arrested for a Crime, Immediately Take These 6 Steps

What Is Third Degree Murder?

Florida is only one of three states that has third-degree murder laws. Pennsylvania and Minnesota are the other two states.

In Florida, third degree murder is outlined under Florida Statutes Section 782.04. It is described as the unintentional killing of a person while committing or attempting a non-violent felony.

The penalty is up to 15 years in prison, 15 years of probation, and a fine of up to $10,000.

Galvin’s arrest report states the shooting was, “committed during the commission of a felony that (Galvan) was involved in.” Because Reyers-Barajas was killed while Galvan was committing a crime, prosecutors say Galvan is in some way responsible for the death.

Third degree murder does not require intent the way that first and second degree murder charges do. In most cases, a death caused by the unintentional act of another person is considered a manslaughter charge, but not in this case.

Related: The Best Criminal Defense Attorneys Have These 7 Qualities

Third Degree Murder vs. Manslaughter: What’s the Difference?

When a death is caused by neglect rather than malicious intent, it is often considered a manslaughter charge, not a murder charge.

Manslaughter is defined under Florida Statutes Section 782.07. It refers to situations where:

• Someone intentionally completed an act that led to the death of another person.
• Someone persuaded or encouraged another person to complete an act that led to that person’s death.
• Someone was culpably negligent which led to the death of another person.

Manslaughter charges typically apply to situations where someone caused another person’s death but they had no prior intent on killing the other person.

In this case, it appears that Galvin had no intent to kill Reyers-Barajas. But because Glavin was engaging in criminal behavior during Reyers-Barajas’ death, he may face the more serious charge of third degree murder.

If convicted, the third degree murder charge will hold more weight on Galvin’s record. But, the potential sentencing for both third degree murder and manslaughter are the same.

They both hold the potential for 15 years in prison, 15 years of probation, and a fine of up to $10,000.

Related: Get Good Legal Representation by Asking This One Question

The Importance of Working with a Top Criminal Defense Attorney

Multiple crimes were in motion on January 7, 2022. Galvan was planning to commit the crime of selling illegal drugs, but instead, he now faces charges for a much more serious crime — a shooting he did not commit but may be responsible for.

If you find yourself in a situation where you are facing minor or serious criminal charges, it is important to seek legal representation as soon as possible. Both misdemeanors and felonies have the potential to change your life and lead to fines, probation, and jail time.

Do not face a criminal charge on your own. Talk to an experienced criminal defense attorney who can help you get the best possible outcome for your situation. If you are facing criminal charges, contact TJ Grimaldi today to see how our team can help you navigate your situation and get the most just outcome. Request an appointment or call 813-226-1023.

May 23, 2018 was a truly awful day for two families. A family lost a young mother and her toddler who died after being struck by a car on Bayshore Boulevard. Another family figuratively lost their son after he hit and killed the woman and her daughter.

Cameron Herrin, the 18-year-old speeding driver who struck and killed Jessica Reisinger-Raubenolt and her 1-year-old daughter, was sentenced to 24 years in prison after pleading guilty to vehicular manslaughter charges.

Now, more than three years later, Herrin’s family is trying to get some of their life back with their son. Is it fair? And, is it possible?

The Accident

On a spring day, Reisinger-Raubenolt took her daughter for a walk on Bayshore Boulevard. They two were in town visiting family.

Around the same time, Herrin and his friend, 17-year-old John Barineau, were on their way to a local gym. Herrin had just graduated from Tampa Catholic High School two days earlier and was driving a new Ford Mustang, his graduation gift. Barineau was driving near him in his Nissan Altima. The two decided to race.

Traveling north from Gandy Boulevard up Bayshore Boulevard toward downtown, the two cars raced, moving in and out of traffic lanes to pass cars, according to witnesses. The Mustang’s Infotainment system would later show that the car reached 102 mph.

As the cars approached Reisinger-Raubenolt and her daughter, witnesses say the Nissan swerved to miss them. The Mustang moved to avoid the Nissan and hit the mother and daughter.

While the Mustang slowed down to about 30 and 40 mph just before the collision, it struck Reisinger-Raubenolt and her daughter. The mother died on impact, and the toddler died the next day from her injuries.

Related: 5 Reasons to Contact a Car Accident Lawyer After a Crash 

The Sentencing

Barineau and Herrin were facing a trial when both decided to plead guilty to the charges against them.

Barineau, the driver of the Nissan, worked with the state on a plea deal. He pled guilty to two vehicular homicide charges and a misdemeanor racing charge in exchange for a six-year sentence with 15 years of probation.

Herrin, the driver responsible for striking and killing the mother and daughter, also pled guilty to two vehicular homicide charges and a misdemeanor racing charge. But, he agreed to an open plea, which put his sentencing in the judge’s hand.

State guidelines suggest a minimum of 18-and-a-half years for the charges against Herrin. The family of the victims asked for the maximum 30-year sentence.

Herrin was sentenced to 24 years, nine years for the mother’s death and 15 for the child’s death to be served consecutively.

Hillsborough Circuit Judge Christopher Nash made the decision after a day of testimony from both Herrin’s and Reisinger-Raubenolt’s family and friends.

Herrin’s defense team argued that Herrin should receive a sentence similar to Barineau, who they believe was equally culpable for the accident. But, the judge gave extra weight to Herrin’s sentencing due to the fact that Herrin was the one who hit the victims and that Herrin had a history of speeding and racing.

Herrin’s car navigation system has recently recorded a speed of 162 mph on Interstate 75 and a speed of 84 mph on Bayshore in the weeks leading up to the accident, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

Related: What You Should Expect from Your Attorney in Every Case

The Appeal

Herrin’s defense team was quick to start the appeal process. They believe Herrin was unfairly sentenced and are taking up a legal challenge. In December, Herrin’s legal team completed the full briefing process, and both the state and the defense have now submitted written arguments to the 2nd District Court of Appeal.

The appeal process begins in the wake of a large and somewhat unusual internet campaign to support Herrin. Content promoting “justice for Cameron” has been seen across Twitter and TikTok. TikTok videos featuring the tag “Cameron Herrin” have been viewed over 2.4 billion times.

Experts believe some of the support is from real people across the world. Herrin’s mother says she receives calls and letters from supporters. But, experts also believe that some of the social media content is produced by international bots, as reported by the Tampa Bay Times.

Herrin’s family and defense team say they have no connection with the outpouring of social media content. But, they are still fighting to get their version of justice for Herrin. Their appeal brief states, “Certainly Cameron deserves to be punished for his role in this horrible case. But what purpose is served by imprisoning this young man for the next twenty-plus years of his life?”

The state plans to fight against a sentence reduction. They believe the sentence is fair for the crime.

In the upcoming months, a three-judge panel will meet to decide whether or not the judge abused his discretion and if there is a legal basis for a trial court to redo Herrin’s sentence. Herrin’s fate will be in their hands.

Related: What Does It Take to Be an Attorney for a High-Profile Case? 

Get Support & Advice For Your Legal Case

In cases like this, there are no winners. A terrible accident devastated two families, and the courts are left to determine which is the best way to provide justice.

If you’ve been involved in a legal matter, you deserve justice and fair representation throughout the court process. Don’t delay if a legal matter is pending in your life. Talk to an attorney right away who can guide you through the process. TJ Grimaldi is here to help. See how he can support your case today. Request an appointment or call 813-226-1023.