When Does a “Fair Trial” Become an “Anything Goes” Prosecution in Orlando?

By: John Guidry

It seems as though sex offenders should officially be labeled as “the least of our brothers,” for those of you with a Christian viewpoint. Think about it—they are the lepers of modern society. Sex offenders cannot live in most places due to residential restrictions, even though they’ve finished their sentence entirely! As if the problems of a sex offender conviction are not enough, it now appears as though these folks are not getting a fair trial on the front end.

Our justice system is supposed to be built on rules, not emotions. But when a case involves a “leper,” those rules often start to bend until they break. We are seeing a “sad but true” trend where prosecutors are allowed to use emotional manipulation to win a conviction rather than actual proof of a crime.

Facing sexual battery charges in Orlando? The State doesn’t get to ignore the rules just because the charge is serious. Protect your rights. Call John Guidry today at (407) 423-1117.

The Legal Breakdown: The Williams Rule and Emotional Manipulation

In the case of Torres v. State, 150 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2011), Mr. Yosvani Torres was charged with sexual battery. The trial judge allowed two things that should have never happened in a fair courtroom:

• Williams Rule Evidence: The judge allowed the State to present evidence of an alleged incident from 13 years prior where Torres supposedly touched someone’s breasts and vagina—even though he was never charged for it. In Florida, the “Williams Rule” (F.S. 90.404) is only supposed to show things like intent or a common plan, not just that someone is a “bad person.”
• The Emotional Impact Trap: To add insult to injury, the trial judge allowed that witness to testify about the emotional impact of that alleged episode from over a decade ago.
• The Reversible Error: Under Florida law, “victim impact testimony” is strictly reserved for the sentencing phase of a trial. It has no business being introduced during the guilt phase to show that an accused is “guilty.” Emotional trauma doesn’t prove a crime happened; it only inflames the jury.

The appellate court unfortunately upheld the conviction, but the dissenting opinion from Judge J. Ramirez is a “breath of fresh air.” He stated, “This case can go down under the ‘anything goes’ department when it comes to a criminal prosecution of an unsympathetic defendant.” He warned that if we allow this, burglary victims will start testifying about being “terrified to leave home” and robbery victims will recount how they “no longer go out at night” just to secure a conviction.

John’s Takeaways

• Guilt is Not About Feelings: In 2024 and 2025, Florida’s rules of evidence still state that the emotional impact of a crime is irrelevant to whether the defendant actually committed the act.
• Williams Rule Limits: Prior bad acts must be relevant to a specific issue like “plan” or “identity.” If the State is just using old stories to make you look like a monster, that is a failure of proof.
• Sentencing vs. Trial: Victim impact statements (VIS) under Marsy’s Law are for the judge to consider during sentencing, not for the jury to hear when deciding if you are innocent or guilty.
• Unsympathetic Defendants Deserve Rules: As Judge Ramirez noted, if the rules of evidence don’t apply to “unsympathetic” defendants, then they don’t really apply to anyone.
• Regional Authority: Whether you are in Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Lake, Brevard, or Volusia County, you need a lawyer who will object the second a prosecutor tries to turn your trial into an emotional “policeman’s benefit.”

The justice system is harsh, and it is “insane” to think that a jury’s verdict can be based on how much a witness is crying about something that allegedly happened in 1998. I’ve been defending the citizens of Central Florida since 1993, and I believe that everyone—especially “the least of our brothers”—is entitled to a trial where the law, not “anything goes” tactics, dictates the outcome.

Facing these charges? Call John at (407) 423-1117.

About John Guidry II

John Guidry II is a seasoned criminal defense attorney and founder of the Law Firm of John P. Guidry II, P.A., located in downtown Orlando next to the Orange County Courthouse, where he has practiced for over 30 years. With more than three decades of experience defending clients throughout Central Florida since 1993, Guidry has successfully defended thousands of cases in Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Brevard, Lake, and Volusia counties. He has built a reputation for his strategic approach to criminal defense, focusing on pretrial motions and case dismissals rather than jury trials.

Guidry earned both his Juris Doctorate and Master of Business Administration from St. Louis University in 1993. He is a member of the Florida Bar and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. His practice encompasses the full spectrum of Florida state criminal charges, with a particular emphasis on achieving favorable outcomes through thorough pretrial preparation and motion practice.

Beyond the courtroom, Guidry is a prolific legal educator who has authored over 400 articles on criminal defense topics. He shares his legal expertise through his popular YouTube channel, Instagram, and TikTok accounts, where he has built a substantial following of people eager to learn about the law. His educational content breaks down complex legal concepts into accessible information for the general public.

When not practicing law, Guidry enjoys tennis and pickleball, and loves to travel. Drawing from his background as a former recording studio owner and music video producer in the Orlando area, he brings a creative perspective to his legal practice and continues to apply his passion for video production to his educational content.