state attorney

Jared Bridegan murder: Florida state attorney announces arrest in Microsoft exec’s slaying

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – The state attorney’s office announced Thursday a new arrest in the shocking murder of Florida father of four Jared Bridegan, who was gunned down in front of his toddler more than a year ago.

Melissa Nelson, the state attorney for Florida’s Fourth Judicial District, and Jacksonville Beach Police Chief Gene Paul Smith said at a press conference that the husband of Bridegan’s ex-wife has been charged in his slaying.

Mario Fernandez, 35, the second husband of Bridegan’s ex-wife, Shanna Gardner-Fernandez, was arrested Thursday morning in Orlando by agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and officers with the Jacksonville Beach Police Department.

Gardner-Fernandez, 35, remains a suspect in the killing, according to law enforcement sources.


Mario Fernandez, right, was arrested Thursday for the murder of Jared Bridegan, left. He's the second husband of Bridegan's ex-wife, Shanna Gardner-Fernandez, far right.

Mario Fernandez, right, was arrested Thursday for the murder of Jared Bridegan, left. He’s the second husband of Bridegan’s ex-wife, Shanna Gardner-Fernandez, far right. (GoFundMe/Instagram)

A judge signed the arrest warrant for Fernandez moments after Henry Tenon, Fernandez’s former tenant, pleaded guilty to fatally shooting Bridegan as part of a plea agreement, Nelson said.

Tenon, 61, has agreed to “testify truthfully against those he worked with to murder Jared Bridegan,” Nelson told reporters at the press conference held at the state attorney’s office in downtown Jacksonville.


“Tenon’s cooperation has both corroborated evidence collected during the investigation and provided additional evidence against Mario Fernandez Saldana for his role in the planning and execution of Jared’s murder,” she added.

Tenon was charged two months ago with second-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder, accessory after the fact and child abuse for his role in the slaying. 


Read the rest

The State Attorney’s Office says it has launched a review of voting record of North Miami Beach Mayor DeFillipo

The State Attorney’s Office says it has launched a review of voting record of North Miami Beach Mayor DeFi

The State Attorney’s Office says it has launched a review of voting record of North Miami Beach Mayor DeFi


MIAMI — The Florida State Attorney’s Office said Monday it is reviewing the 2022 voting record of North Miami Beach Mayor Anthony DeFillipo who has been accused of representing the city even though he lives outside city limits.

The investigation by CBS Miami was the first to uncover that DeFillipo voted three times from a North Miami Beach home he no longer lived at and sold in 2021.

During the investigation by CBS Miami, we obtained photos from a private investigator that showed DeFillipo, his wife and children at a $1.2 million home he purchased in Davie.

North Miami Beach Major Anthony DeFillipo


Videos and photos showed him there day after day for weeks last November.

The city is challenging his true residency in court to see if he is still eligible to remain as the mayor.

DeFillipo has maintained he lives in North Miami Beach in a one-bedroom condo.

CBS 4 has asked DeFillipo at least a half-dozen times to explain his voting record and asked again on Monday for an interview.

But he continued to refuse to speak to CBS 4 and answer our questions even though he did speak to other media outlets.

There’s also a counter lawsuit into Vice Mayor Michael Joseph and whether he violated the city charter by not attending recent commission meetings.

On Monday evening, Joseph released the following statement:

“The state attorney‘s office knows what many of us have been demanding to know: Is Mr. Defillipo covering up the truth about his residency to keep his seat or has he been

Read the rest

State attorney general actions: Strategies for venue and settlement differ from typical litigation

February 16, 2023 – Litigation against a state attorney general can be catastrophic for the company on the receiving end of the confidential regulatory investigation that precipitated the filing of a complaint. When a state attorney general makes the previously unknown regulatory investigation public, a company will likely face negative publicity, customer or consumer questions, outrage, regulatory scrutiny, and private lawsuits. And that is before taking into account the business opportunities, employee recruitment efforts, goodwill in the marketplace, and valuations that are all likely to suffer in the wake of an investigation being made public.

Many companies and their outside counsel mistakenly believe that the same tactics they employ for typical litigation against the plaintiffs’ bar or commercial competitors would be just as effective when litigating a state attorney general action. Relying on these same tactics, however, could cost companies dearly because litigation initiated by state attorneys general differs significantly from litigation initiated by private plaintiffs.

Latest Updates

View 2 more stories

In the first part of this two-part series, we discuss three reasons why litigators must approach state attorney general actions differently than typical litigation:

(1) Unlike private plaintiffs, state attorneys general can and usually do investigate companies before filing a lawsuit.

(2) State attorneys general are motivated by public policy considerations.

(3) Changes within state attorneys general offices can affect the direction of a suit.

There are two additional reasons why litigators should approach these two kinds of actions differently. State attorneys general may have procedural advantages in that venue normally remains in state court; and they could have leverage in settlement discussions when civil penalties were available. Both concern the way litigators must engage with state attorneys general in the litigation trenches.

Litigation involving state attorneys general will almost always take place in state

Read the rest

Elliot Blair suffered 40 head fractures before death at a Mexican resort, lawyers say

Californian lawyer Elliot Blair suffered a badly fractured skull and bruises across his body before he died at a Mexican resorta family attorney says.

the Orange County public defender‘s mysterious death at the Las Rocas Resort and Spa in Rosarito Beach on 14 January was initially ruled as a result of an accidental fall by mexican authorities.

However, his wife Kimberly Williams believes he was murdered and requested a second independent autopsy to be carried out in the United States.

Preliminary results have revealed that Blair, 33, had more than 40 fractures on his head mostly in the back of his skull and left side of his face, attorney Case Barnett told the New York Post.

Mr Barnett told the Post that the injuries suggest Blair was beaten by several assassins and that he may have been “hit and dragged”.

“It’s obvious to us and to the experts we have spoken to that this is foul play,” he said.

The second autopsy revealed several alarming inconsistencies from the account of his death put forward by Mexican authorities.

The fractures to Blair’s head were on the opposite side to where he had been found lying on concrete, Mr Barnett said.

And a large black mark on his arm could have been a defensive wound, Mr Barnett added.

Blair and his wife had been celebrating their first wedding anniversary by dancing and karaoke at the resort just south of Tijuana on the night he died.

  (GoFundMe/Elliot Blair)

(GoFundMe/Elliot Blair)

Ms Williams has said that after leaving the Spash Baja bar and restaurant at about 7pm that two local police officers extorted them for money.

“The officer asked us where we were staying and what we were doing in Rosarito,” Ms Williams told ABC News.

“Elliot told him we were on vacation. He

Read the rest

Arizona Attorney General’s Office asks FBI, IRS to investigate group behind ‘2000 Mules’

Catherine Engelbrecht.

Catherine Engelbrecht.

Republican candidates for top statewide offices in Arizona have said they believe what they saw in the election-conspiracy movie “2000 Mules.”

Now, the state Attorney General’s Office is asking the FBI and IRS for investigations of the group behind the movie, True the Vote, noting that it has repeatedly rebuffed all requests to share the documentary’s alleged evidence and has raised “considerable sums of money” based on claims of having that evidence.

“Given TTV’s status as a nonprofit organization, it would appear that further review of its financials may be warranted,” wrote Reginald “Reggie” Grigsby, chief special agent of the office’s Special Investigations Section.

The film, released in May and thoroughly debunked by experts and media organizations, claims mobile-phone data obtained by the group shows a coordinated effort by hundreds of people around the country — deemed “mules” — to stuff election drop boxes with ballots for candidate Joe Biden in 2020. True the Vote’s representatives said they would use their findings to make elections more secure.

But the moviemakers have since refused to release any of their supposed data to law enforcement groups even after promising to do so, the Attorney General’s Office said in the two-page letter Friday.

Grigsby’s letter accuses True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht and its contractor Gregg Phillips of providing misleading information to his office and other law enforcement groups. He also mentions some of the bogus information the group has previously put out related to the movie, such as the false claims that the group helped solve a murder in Atlanta and break a ballot-harvesting case in San Luis, Arizona.

In sum, the information points to “potential violations” of tax code given True the Vote’s 501(c)3 nonprofit status, the letter states.

True the Vote didn’t respond to an email Friday from

Read the rest

Andrea Campbell for attorney general

The next state attorney general will step in to lead the nationally respected office amid a host of urgent challenges: an increasing unreliable public transit system woefully lacking in accountability; criminal justice and correction institutions in direct need of reform; and a Supreme Court intent on tying the hands of state officials’ efforts to curb gun violence and protect reproductive rights, just to name a few.

That’s on top of the rest of the attorney general’s responsibilities, which range from watchdogging the health care system to rooting out public corruption.

Democratic primary voters have a choice between three candidates who offer different, if at times overlapping, visions of how to tackle these and other issues as the Commonwealth’s top attorney. But Andrea Campbell has proven herself to be the best among the choices. She has the Globe’s enthusiastic endorsement in the Sept. 6 primaries.

A Princeton-educated former Boston city councilor, Campbell’s personal experience, her track record for taking on institutions like the Boston Police and Fire Departments, and her thoughtful and innovative vision to make the attorney general’s office more responsive to and protective of residents across the entirety of Commonwealth, make her stand out. She has demonstrated carefully considered plans about not only what she would do in the office, but also how the office itself can be transformed in order to be a more effective and responsive organization in tune with the interests of the state’s residents.

One of the areas where her focus on increased transparency and accountability is most needed is the state Department of Correction, which she correctly describes as a “black hole” of opacity.

Her commitment to address misconduct within the agency — including her willingness to take the unusual position

Read the rest