Mayowa Odusanya is an expert in the fields of criminal law and real estate.
Mayowa F. Odusanya
401 S Parsons Ave
Brandon, FL 33511-5292
Phone: (813) 598-3870
Mayowa F. Odusanya's education includes:
Florida International University, College of Law, Juris Doctor, 2009
Florida A. & M. University, B.S., 2005.
Former work experience includes the Miami Dade Public Defender's Office; and the law firm of Walton, Jones & Browne, P.A.
Mayowa F. Odusanya announced today that he is setting up a new blog https://modusanya.blogspot.com/ which will focus primarily on Criminal Law, and how the law is changing.
“With all the recent news and hard-to-understand information regarding Criminal Law, I felt that I could help explain the issues and explain to people where to find additional information” said Mayowa Odusanya. “I have a decade of experience working in this area, and can help people understand the issues and obtain initial information to understand a certain matter. For example, many courts now make forms available on their websites and they provide lists of pro bono attorneys.”
Criminal Law is complex and constantly evolving. For example, Mr. Odusanya’s blog will include a discussion of the case of Gamble v. United States which is pending in the U.S. Supreme Court. Gamble v. United States is a case being appealed from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, originating from the state of Alabama.
The defendant Terance Martez Gamble was pulled over in a traffic stop in 2015 for a broken taillight. During the stop, the police officer found a gun in Gamble’s car. Because Gamble had a prior conviction for felony robbery, he was barred from owning a firearm. Gamble was charged with illegal possession of a firearm by the state of Alabama and served one year in state prison. Afterwards, Gamble was charged by the Federal Government arising out of the same incident under the federal statute forbidding illegal possession of a firearm. Gamble was convicted and is currently serving time in federal prison.
Gamble challenged the federal prosecution during the trial in federal district court and then subsequently on appeal as violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Gamble’s challenge was denied due to a long-established exception to the Double Jeopardy clause known as separate or dual sovereigns doctrine. Supreme Court’s cert is interesting given that it is reviewing a well-established doctrine in a case with fairly routine application of the principle. What adds intrigue to the cert is the fact that in Puerto Rico v. Sanchez-Valle, a 2016 case, Justice Ginsburg and Justice Thomas joined in a concurring opinion that discussed the need to revisit the separate sovereigns doctrine. While Sanchez-Valle case was decided on the Court’s finding that Puerto Rico did not have sovereignty independent from the Federal Government, Justice Ginsburg’s concurrence questioned the separate sovereigns doctrine as a whole. Mr. Odusanya notes that whether Justice Ginsburg and Justice Thomas tipped their hands in Sanchez-Valle will remain to be seen in Gamble v. United States.
The complete article and comment will be published in the Blog of Mr. Odusanya at https://modusanya.blogspot.com/
Mayowa Odusanya is planning to inform the public about this and other developments that they may not read about in the newspaper or see on television.