 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Appeals court scrutinizes law on handcuff keys
By CHRISTOPHER GOFFARD, Times Staff Writer TAMPA -- David V. Roman was no stranger to the squeeze of handcuffs on his wrists. By the time the Sheriff's Office came for him on the morning of Oct. 25, 2000, the Tampa man already had racked up arrests from Hillsborough to Brevard counties on charges of theft, carrying a concealed weapon, license fraud and bigamy. On that October day, a Hillsborough sheriff's deputy was arresting Roman on a probation violation from a bigamy charge. Authorities say Roman answered the door in his underwear and asked the deputy for time to pull on some clothes. He slipped a magnetic money clip into his pocket. During a pat-down, the deputy found the clip -- and a handcuff key attached to it. Roman explained that he always carried it. Thanks to a law passed in response to the murder of three police officers by an escaped felon, the key brought Roman still another criminal charge. The law, meant to protect officers, forbids possession of a concealed handcuff key by people in custody. In pleading no contest to the charge last August, Roman received only 12 days of probation and a bill for court costs. But he reserved his right to appeal. Now, the 2nd District Court of Appeal is considering Roman's challenge to his conviction on the grounds that the law is unconstitutional. It is expected to be the first appellate ruling on the law and may play a large role in shaping how it can be enforced. All of this can be traced directly to a tragic day in May 1998 when career criminal Hank Earl Carr was being questioned by two Tampa homicide detectives about the shooting of his girlfriend's child. The detectives allowed him to wear his handcuffs in front. Using a handcuff key concealed around his neck, he escaped his restraints, murdered the detectives and, soon after, shot to death a pursuing Florida Highway Patrol trooper in Pasco County. Carr later killed himself after taking a hostage at a Hernando County gas station. The rampage sparked widespread outrage and, eventually, the new law. Last week, assistant public defender Anthony Candela argued before a three-judge panel of the appeals court that the law is too vague as written. He said it does not make clear that it applies only to suspects in custody. "You have to bounce around the statute" to find the legislative intent, Candela said. What if you're standing in line at a store when a handcuff key accidentally falls out of your pocket next to a policeman? Will he arrest you? Candela also argued that the definition of a handcuff key is so vague that it criminalizes the possession of perfectly innocent items such as paper clips. Assistant Attorney General Susan Dunlevy, arguing for the state, acknowledged that the law was "inartfully drafted." But she said the defense did not have standing to argue that the law is too vague, since Roman's arrest did not depend on a vague interpretation of "handcuff key." "We're not talking about a paper clip. We're not talking about a bobby pin," Dunlevy said. "We're talking about a standard handcuff key that he had." The 2nd District Court of Appeal is expected to issue a ruling on Roman's case in coming weeks. -- Times researcher Cathy Wos contributed to this report. Christopher Goffard can be reached at (813) 226-3337 or goffard@sptimes.com.
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
|
