In the debut episode of Zone of Risk, trial attorneys Joni Mosely and Spencer Charif dive headfirst into three courtroom sagas you have to hear to believe.

The Karen Read retrial: a high-profile case featuring discredited expert witnesses, alleged police cover-ups, and a prosecution theory torn apart by its own evidence.

The Diddy/Cassie case: and why the defense’s strategy to flip blame on the victim could actually work.

And a case from Joni and Spencer’s own war chest, involving a loaded gun used during sex... and a defense so wild, it made the judge go silent.

This is where legal analysis meets raw courtroom chaos.

Welcome to the Zone of Risk.

Watch the full video episode on YouTube:
https://youtu.be/ZCI3FHTg_tM

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Hey folks. Robert here. I have decided to step away from the podcast for an indeterminate period of time. Thank you for listening and for your support.

Melanie Kalmanson, a partner at Quarlers & Brady, joined Robert to discuss a new Florida statute that requires judges to impose a sentence of death if an "unauthorized alien" commits a capital offense. Melanie and Robert examine potential constitutional issues the law faces under current Supreme Court precedent and how the law will be challenging for trial courts to implement.

921.1426 Sentence of death for capital offense committed by unauthorized alien. —Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the court shall sentence a defendant who is an unauthorized alien and who is convicted or adjudicated guilty of a capital felony to a sentence of death. As used in this section, the term “unauthorized alien” has the same meaning as in s. 908.111.

Subscribe to Melanie's substack - Tracking Florida's Death Penalty.

Read the full text of the statute here.

Please send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

On February 6, Robert debated Judge Adam Tanenbaum (First DCA) about whether the prior-panel rule applies in the DCAs. The rule requires 3-judge appellate panels to follow prior-panel precedent unless the court overrules the prior precedent en banc or the precedent has been overruled by the Florida Supreme Court.

Robert is a proponent of the rule, which he argues flows from Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.331 (the en banc rule) and is supported by Florida Supreme Court precedent.

Judge Tanenbaum is an opponent of the rule, which he argues has no basis in law and is contrary to article V, section 4(a) of Florida's Constitution.

Robert co-authored an article in The Florida Bar Journal explaining his position. Judge Tanenbaum's position is best articulated in his concurring opinions in Normandy Ins. Co. v. Bouayad, 372 So. 3d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023) (en banc), review granted, No. SC2023-1576, 2024 WL 4449458 (Fla. Oct. 9, 2024) and BAM Trading Servs. Inc. v. Off. of Fin. Regul., 395 So. 3d 687 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024) (en banc).

Thanks to the Hillsborough County Bar Association for hosting the event and to David Costello of the Florida Office of the Attorney General and Dimitri Peteves of Creed and Gowdy P.A. for an amazing job organizing and moderating the debate.

Please send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Aliza Shatzman joined Robert on this episode. Aliza is the President and Founder of the Legal Accountability Project. The Project’s mission is to "ensure law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not." Aliza shared her experience as a law clerk and explained the Project’s great resources for future law clerks. She and Robert also discussed the kerfuffle at a recent federalist society event where two judges from the Fifth Circuit and Professor Steve Vladeck went a few rounds on judicial independence.

Follow Aliza on LinkedIn. Watch the FedSoc debate here.

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Lindsey, Joni, and Robert rundown several appellate opinions from October 2024.

Contact to get on the Guardian ad Litem pro bono mailing list: Samuel Alexander samuel@alexanderappeals.com.

• In re: Amends. to R. Regulating Fla. Bar 6-10.3, FSC (CLE credit for pro bono hours).
• McLane Foodservice Inc., v. Wool, 3d DCA (punitive damages).
• BAM Trading Servs., Inc. v. Florida, Off. Fin. Regul., 1st DCA (en banc) (prior panel rule; judicial review of emergency suspension orders).
• Wheeler v. Dovey, 2d DCA (attorneys’ fees).
• Ragan v. State, 3d DCA (single-homicide rule; double jeopardy).
• Sills v. Motor Care Concepts, II, 6th DCA (timeliness of motion for rehearing).
• United States v. Maher, 2d Circuit (Fourth Amendment; private search doctrine).
• Davis v. State, 1st DCA (competency hearings; fundamental error).

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Joni and Robert were joined by Florida Bar President Roland Sanchez-Medina, Jr. They discussed President Sanchez-Medina's path to the law, his vision for the Bar, and what he is doing to make the practice of law "kinder and gentler."

Thank You Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

On November 11, 2024, the Miami Herald reported, "Miami Judge's Venomous Texts Come Back to Bite her in Crumbling Death Penalty Case." The article leads of: "An appellate judge at the center of one of Miami’s biggest criminal cases is facing intense scrutiny after text messages were released showing her pressuring Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle about how to handle the case, denigrating defense attorneys and badmouthing local judges."

Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist, Brittany Wallman, who co-authored the article with Charles Rabin for the Herald, joined Robert to discuss the backstory of the capital murder case and the text messages between Judge Bronwyn Miller and State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle. In one text message, Judge Miller suggested to the State Attorney that she move to disqualify the trial judge handling the resentencing of the defendant, Corey Smith, so the trial judge's decision to remove two assistant state attorneys from the case for prosecutorial misconduct could be reconsidered.

• Miami Gangster's Life Could be Spared After Prosecutor Misconduct Undermines Murder Case
• Miami Judge's Venomous Texts Come Back to Bite her in Crumbling Death Penalty Case
• State no Longer Seeking Death Penalty in Trial of Convicted Gang Leader and Murderer

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.