GOOGLE Reviews
AVVO Reviews

Sex Offenses Case Results

Internal Reference #1012

Sex Crime

Facts: On April 6, Detective J received a call from Detective B concerning an online investigation with a suspect who lives in Sunrise, FL. Detective B said that he was investigating a case where the adult suspect was communication with a person he believed to be a 14-year-old female. Further, there was a conversation that took place concerning sex and the transmission of images. As a result, he asked me to obtain a search warrant for the residence.

On April 12. Detective J obtained a search warrant for the location. Detective J subsequently informed Detective B that the search warrant was obtained and agreed to execute it with him the following day.

On April 13, Detective W was assigned to a surveillance post at the residence. At approximately 12:15 p.m. a person identified as the homeowner, Defendant left the residence. At that point, Detective W identified himself and told the defendant that he had a search warrant for the residence.

Detective J arrived on scene and spoke with the defendant in front of the residence. Detective J explained to the defendant that I had a search warrant for the residence and that a detective with another agency was en route to the house and would explain everything in detail to him once he arrived. Detective J explained to the defendant that it would be about 25 minutes before the detective arrived and if he wanted to wait for him he could. The defendant was very cooperative and said that he wanted to wait for the detective because he wanted to speak with him about the case. The defendant was free to leave and was never placed in handcuffs but voluntarily chose to stay.

Detective J spoke with the defendant in front of the residence and told him what he just told his father. Detective J told the defendant that he was not under arrest and that he only had a search warrant for the house. He also said that he wanted to wait for the detective to find out more information about the case. The defendant was never placed in handcuffs or told where to stand but voluntarily chose to stay at the residence.

Detective B arrived on scene and interviewed the defendant’s father and the defendant. The defendant’s father said that his son has his own computer in his room and that he ahs the other computer that he shares with his wife in the front room of the house. The defendant’s father said that he only uses his computer for banking transactions and to play games.

Detective B also interviewed the defendant in the kitchen area. The defendant admitted that he uses the chat room that Detective B was in at the time of the conversation and that he remembered sending several pictures of his body, including pictures of a penis, to a person he believed to be a 14 year old female.

Detective J photographed the residence and subsequently placed the photos into evidence. Detective B and Detective J then collected one laptop computer from the defendant’s room, a desktop computer tower from the front room and various electronic devices from the residence pursuant to the search warrant. Detective B retained the evidence so that a forensic examination can be completed.

The defendant signed the property receipt for the property that was collected and they were provided with a receipt. Detective J also gave a copy of the search warrant to the defendant and left the residence.

On April 14 th, Detective J submitted the return inventory to the court. Detective B is handling the remainder of the case.

There was probable cause to believe that the defendant a person over 18 years of age, did intentionally send harmful material to who he believed to be a minor (14 year old female), by sending lewd, nude images of male genitalia, using an electronic device, i.e. computer and instant messaging. The defendant was arrested and charged with FSS 847.0138, a third degree felony.

The original charge would have made the Defendant a Registered Sex Offender for life.

Results: After numerous discussions with the state attorneys office, Mr. Foley was able to convince the state to change the sexual offense to a non sex crime and the defendant pled no contest to Offense Against Computers Users (3 rd degree Felony) against and received a withhold of adjudication and two years probation.

Internal Reference #1042

Facts: The defendant was identified by drivers license, is currently a registered sexual officer/predator, convicted of a sexual offense in which the victim was under the age of 16 who is residing at the above address is within 47.672 ft. from the address in violation of municipal ordinance 07-97. The minimum distance separation between the residence and the area was measured by following a straight-line method on the city’s GIS mapping software program.

Results: Dismissed. No Prison, No Jail, No Conviction. Case Dismissed.

Internal Reference #1143

Sex Crimes

Facts: The affiant is part of a National Task Force that investigates internet crimes against children child pornography and other related offenses.

On July 21, 2011, the affiant initiated an investigation into the distribution of child pornography on a Peer-To-Peer file sharing network. The affiant located an IP address, accessing the network and offering to share child pornography videos and images between April 8 and July 24. A total of 27 child pornography files were observed during this time period. The video images found contained very young children under the age of 13 engaging in various sex acts with and without adults.

The IP address was registered to a cable company and a subpoena was issued for the account holder and associated information for the subscriber who was using the IP address, at the time the mentioned files were noted on the suspect computer.

The records provided by the cable company showed that this customer was continually assigned the IP address between the dates of May 1 and July 24

A search warrant was obtained on August 4 and signed by the judge.

At approximately 6:15 am, on August 5 th, the search warrant was served at an address and contact was made with the three residents of the house including the defendant who were advised of the situation. All parties were interviewed separately.

The defendant stated that he uses the computer, which is located in the living room. The defendant stated that he has used a program before to download music and videos. The defendant was read his Miranda warnings and stated that he understood his rights and was willing to answer questions without the presence of his attorney.

The defendant admitted to downloading child pornography (videos) on the computer located in the living room. The defendant stated that he would download the child pornography videos, and then view. The defendant stated that he ahs never touched a child in a sexual matter and has never wanted to have sex with a child.

At the scene, a Computer Forensic Examiner conducted a forensic preview on the computer that the defendant used to download child poronography. The computer hard drive which yielded, 11 child pornography videos which were located under the profile with the defendants name on it in his “My Documents Folder” in which it contained the Peer-to-Peer program saved folder. The videos depicted young females under the age of 12 engaging in sexual acts such as; oral sex, vaginal sex and digital penetration.

The defendant was placed into custody and transported to the main jail for processing.

The defendant was arrested and charged with 11 counts of Sexual Performance by a Child (possession) 827.071(5)

Results: 11 Counts of Sexual Performance By a Child (possession) – Counts 2 through 11 dismissed . Count 1 was amended to a Felony Obsecenity charge – 5 years of probation with a withhold of adjudication. No sexual registration.

Internal Reference #1089

Facts: The defendant was actively engaged in living off of the earnings of two prostitutes at a motel. According to one of the prostitutes, the defendant collected a percentage of her daily earnings from her prostitution activities and also paid for the hotel room where these activities occurred. The defendant also carried a firearm to protect both of the prostitutes should any clients cause problems. The defendant was in possession of a Revolver.


  1. Deriving Proceeds from Prostitution (796.05)
  2. Possession/Use Firearm During Felony (790.07.2)

Process: Mr. Foley contacted the state attorneys office and was immediately able to have the Firearm charge dismissed. The remaining charge of Deriving Proceeds from Prostitution went to felony court. Mr. Foley filed an open plea with the court (negotiating directly with the judge, rather then the state attorney). The defendant received 1 year of non-reporting probation.


  1. Deriving Proceeds from Prostitution (796.05) – 1-year non-reporting probation
  2. Possession/Use Firearm During Felony (790.07.2) - Dismissed

Internal Reference #2004

Charges: Indecent Exposure

Result: Indecent Exposure – Dismissed

Case Dismissed

Internal Reference #3003, 3004 and 3005 all same defendant

Facts: On indicated date and time, Officer F. was in plain clothes driving an unmarked vehicle, posing as a prostitution customer in an effort to combat street level prostitution. Defendant and co-defendant were on the west side of a busy street, waving and flagging down vehicles. Officer F. stopped his vehicle and both defendant and co-defendant entered without invitation. Once inside, both defendant and co-defendant agreed to give Officer F. “head” in exchange for $150 total. Defendant and co-defendant were arrested and taken in for booking.

Charges: Soliciting for prostitution (OFLD16115)

Result: Soliciting for prostitution (OFLD16115) – Dismissed

All Charges Dismissed

Internal Reference #3004

Facts: Officer J., along with other members of the investigative unit, have been investigating the crime of prostitution along this street for the past several years. This is a well known area for street-level prostitutes to ply their trade. On the date in question, this officer, along with detectives F. and S., conducted an undercover operation to combat this issue along the street. Officer J. was dressed in plain clothes and posing as a potential customer AKA a “John.” The two listed defendants were observed walking northbound. Both subjects were waving at passing motorists in an effort to gain their attention. Officer J. then exited the undercover auto and walked in the direction to encounter them as they walked on the sidewalk. Upon getting within a few feet of them, co-defendant stated, “Hey baby, how you doing?”

Upon Officer J.’s reply that he was looking for a good time, both defendants replied that they were “working.” The word “working” is common street language for a prostitute that is presently soliciting a sex act for compensation. Upon asking the two the price to have sex with both, they both advised that the price would be one hundred dollars apiece for a total of two hundred dollars. Officer J. agreed to this. They advised that they had a motel room down the street. They advised that one of their friends had rented the room for them. Upon walking in the direction of the motel, detectives F. and S. pulled up and detained the defendant and co-defendant. They were advised that they were under arrest for prostitution and would be issued a Notice to Appear for the crime.

Process: This was defendant’s second case for prostitution taken by Mr. Foley.

Charges: Soliciting for prostitution (OFLD16115)

Result: Soliciting for prostitution (OFLD16115) – Dismissed; defendant agreed to move out of jurisdiction + get AIDS test.

All Charges Dismissed

Internal Reference #3005

Facts: On the above listed date, Detective W., Detective F., Detective B., and Detective R. conducted an investigation into possible prostitution related activity at an “in-call and outcall” advertisement on an online message board. The advertisement read “Start your weekend the right way with me today! Incalls and outcalls. Call Lacey” and included a phone number. The advertisement included a picture of a white female with dark hair dressed in a red fishnet tank-top. A copy of the listed advertisement was attached to this report and the original was placed in evidence.

Detective R. posed as a potential client and made telephone contact (using the listed number) with “Lacey” (the defendant), who was advertising on the Internet site. A female answered and Detective R. inquired about the Internet advertisement. The female immediately stated that she was “Lacey” and a thirty minute session would be $150 and an hour session would be $220. The defendant then told Det. R. to call her back when he was approximately thirty minutes from the location. Det. R. re-established phone contact with the defendant and advised her that he was thirty minutes away. The defendant told Det. R. to call her back once he arrived at the location. Once he arrived, he called the listed phone number and was greeted by the defendant. The defendant advised Det. R. to drive to a nearby motel.

Prior to responding to the motel, it was agreed that Det. W., Det. F, and Det. B. would act as back-up and would assist if violations or illegal activity were documented on this part of the investigation. Det. R. also photocopied $230 that was to be used as payment for the session fee. The group then proceeded to the motel. Det. R. called the listed number and once again spoke with the defendant. She told Det. R. to park his vehicle and he advised her that he was parking in the parking lot of a nearby restaurant. The defendant then asked Det. R. to describe an article of his clothing, so she would be able to recognize him. Det. R. told her the color of his shirt. The defendant then told Det. R. to enter the north gate of the motel and follow the path and he would see her. Once inside the courtyard, a female wearing a green short dress standing in front of a room waved Det. R. over to her location. The female greeted Det. R. and invited him into the room.

Once inside the room, the defendant closed the door behind her and locked the door. The defendant immediately opened her dress top and exposed her breast and asked Det. R. to touch her breast. Det. R. reached up and grabbed her shoulder and sat her on the bed. Det. R. quickly changed the subject with some small talk about her hair and age. After this short conversation, the two discussed payment for the session. Det. R. asked the defendant what rules he would have to follow; defendant said anything but anal sex. Det. R. then asked her if she had any condoms and she advised Det. R. that she had everything they needed. Det. R. then gave defendant $220. Defendant placed the money into her purse inside the top night stand drawer. She then pulled out one condom and vanilla spice hemp crème and placed it on top of the night stand. The defendant began to undress but Det. R. asked her for a massage first. While the defendant was in the process of rubbing Det. R.’s back, contact was established with Det. W. He was waiting outside of the room with Det. F. and Det. B. and was asked by Det. R. to make his presence known and to assist Det. R. with taking the defendant into custody. The three detectives then knocked on the door to the room and identified themselves as police officers. The defendant would not unlock or open the door for them. At this point, Det. R. identified himself as a police officer and opened the door to allow them into the room. Det. R. informed the defendant that she was being placed under arrest for the charge of prostitution. The defendant was then transported by a marked patrol unit for booking. The original ad was placed into evidence along with the condom.

Procedure: This was the defendant’s third prostitution case with Mr. Foley, which happened soon after the second.

Charges: Soliciting for prostitution (OFLD16115)

Result: Soliciting for prostitution (OFLD16115) – Dismissed; defendant agreed to move out of jurisdiction + get AIDS test.

All Charges Dismissed

Internal Reference #5026

Facts: ∆ solicited undercover officer Det. Jones for the act of prostitution.

Charges: Soliciting prostitution (796.07)

Result: Soliciting prostitution (796.07) – plea deal, Withhold of Adjudication, court costs, agreed to submit proof of HIV test

No Jail No Probation

Internal Reference #10001

Facts: The defendant, who is 15 years old, did commit the offense of lewd or lascivious molestation by intentionally fondling and licking the penis and buttocks of the 6 year old victim. The defendant also had the victim touch and lick his (defendant’s) penis. These events took place at the defendant’s residence. The victim’s mother dropped off the victim, at the defendant’s residence so that he could “baby sit” the victim for her. The victim was to be at the home for approximately four hours.

According the victim, he and the defendant were playing in the defendant’s bedroom. He stated that when no adults were at the residence, the defendant “licked my butt” and “touched my weanis”. Officer S asked the victim what his “weanis” was and he said it was where his pee comes out. The victim also stated that the defendant touched his penis several times. The victim descried how the defendant pulled down his pants in the front so that he could lick and touch the defendant’s penis. The victim also described how he pulled his pants down and the defendant attempted to put his penis in the victim’s anus. Officer S asked the victim if it hurt and he stated that the defendant could not get it in because it was too big. The victim also stated that the defendant licked his penis.

The statement was conducted at the sexual assault treatment center and was video and audio taped.

The defendant was subsequently interviewed and after Miranda was read he confirmed all of the above allegations in a sworn taped statement. In addition, he stated that he also kissed the victim. He further stated that he knew what he had done was wrong and was sorry.

The defendant was placed under arrest and transported to jail.


  1. Lewd/Lascivious Molestation
  2. Sexual Battery Upon A Child – Defendant less than 18 years of age

Process: Mr. Foley was Co Counsel on the case.

Result: The defendant was sentenced to Juvenile Probation and 100 hours of community service. The defendant later applied for a termination of probation, which was denied.

Internal Reference #20260

Facts: At approximately 3:00AM the above defendant did force the victim to have vaginal and anal sex against her wishes. After having vaginal sex the defendant physically restrained the victim. The victim told the defendant to stop when he refused. The victim was taken to a sexual assault treatment center. Results pending. The defendant is currently on probation for cocaine sales. During these acts, the defendant punched the victim several times in the face. He was taken to the main jail.


  1. Sexual battery victim over 12 years of age physical force (794.011(5)) – Maximum Penalty: 15 years in prison
  2. Sexual battery victim over 12 years of age physical force (794.011(5)) – Maximum Penalty: 15 years in prison
  3. False/imprisonment/adult (787.02(1a1)) – Maximum Penalty: 5 years in prison
  4. Touch or strike/battery/domestic violence (784.03(1a1)) – Maximum Penalty: 1 year in jail

Process: Mr. Foley was retained by the victim of the case. She gave a statement on the client’s behalf. Mr. Foley spoke with the state and showed them the statement, which resulted in the case being dismissed.


  1. Sexual battery victim over 12 years of age physical force – Dismissed
  2. Sexual battery victim over 12 years of age physical force – Dismissed
  3. False/imprisonment/adult – Dismissed
  4. Touch or strike/battery/domestic violence – Dismissed

No Jail, No Prison, No Probation, Case Dismissed

Click on the following reviews to see what clients are saying about us
Client Reviews
I was charged with Domestic Violence few years ago and I was referred to Roger Foley from a family member! Roger is a BULLDOG! He was great ... Thomas
My wife (Mother of Stepson) and I Hired Mr Foley to represent my stepson in a minor criminal case. We would highly recommend ... Steve
Roger P. Foley got me reinstated. Also he got my COS waived, and got me to still be terminated off of probation on my expected termination date ... Jamar
Roger is a very compassionate person, he truly cares about his clients. He helped me with my case and was there for me every step of the way ... Cassandra G.
I think your firm did a great job on 3 cases that were 28 years old. The results are better than expected. I truly appreciate the hard work that ... Jim