Menu
Find answers to your most common questions straight from the mouth of your attorneys here at Farkas & Crowley.
I think our firm is a little bit unique in the sense that there is two of us. In a lot of other firms that have multiple attorneys, you would be assigned a single attorney within that firm, and they would pretty much be the only person that you’d have contact with aside from support staff. In our particular situation, we consider ourselves more of a team. You may have more day-to-day contact with one of us, but we’re both always aware of what is going on in all of the cases. Then, for trials, particularly on bigger cases, we work together, so you would get, basically, two attorneys in the courtroom for the price of one.
We also think that being a male and female team is unique and helpful in very specific types of cases. Sometimes it’s easier to have a female handle other female witnesses or children, issues like that. I always think more minds are better. You can get different suggestions from each other, maybe think of approaches to the cases that the other didn’t come up with, and I think that makes us very unique.
My standard answer to that question is typically no. The strongest support for that answer is really that, when you reach the point that you’re being asked to submit to a breathalyzer test, you’ve already been placed under arrest. Whether you blow under or not, that arrest is not being reversed. It’s not like some people may see on TV that you can do a breathalyzer test on the side of the street. They’re going to check, and if you’re under the legal limit, you get to keep on driving. That’s not how it works.
They do a determination on the side of the street where they evaluate your signs of impairment and make a decision whether or not they’re going to ask you to submit to the field sobriety exercises on the side of the road, and then, at which point, based on what they observe, they will make an arrest. Typically, if you’re being asked to submit to the field sobriety exercises, you’re likely already going to be arrested. Then, once you’re arrested, you’re then transported to what we call the BAT facility. Some agencies use a different facility, but most agencies in Palm Beach County, you will be transported to the BAT facility. There, they’ll do a 20-minute observation, so you’ll be waiting during that period of time. That’s for them to observe whether or not you put anything in your mouth or anything that could affect the breathalyzer, and then you would be asked to submit.
You’re already well under arrest. You’re hours in, typically, at this point. That too, that amount of time elapse can have an effect on what the results of the breathalyzer would come out to be, sometimes in your favor, sometimes not. I think most attorneys would agree most attorneys would say no. There are several reasons for that, but the strongest one is there’s really no benefit to you. You’re not being un-arrested or not arrested because of it at that point. Even if it’s potentially inaccurate results or something, you may be providing evidence in a situation where you’re already under arrest, so there’s no reason.
The more serious cases are much more likely to end up resolving in a trial and that you will need a trial team and trial attorneys to handle those types of situations. Part of that is due to how harsh, for lack of a better word, Florida’s sentencing scheme is for certain types of crimes. Having a trial team, attorneys that are very experienced in trial is absolutely the utmost importance if you’re going to go into a trial. I mean, it’s probably the most important thing you’ll ever do in your life. There’s so much at risk.
We have a very, very large amount of trial experience, both because my partner and I started as prosecutors and have handled a large amount of trials and due to the fact that, when we originally opened the firm, we were also taking on cases as independent contractors for the Office of Regional Conflict Counsel, which is similar to a public defender’s office when there’s conflicts. That created a situation where we had a large amount of trial cases, more than most can experience that are just in private practice.
Many, many cases resolve in some form of plea agreement. I would say upwards of 90%. Because of that, if you’re only handling private cases and lower-level cases, you just don’t see the courtroom, the trials the way that you would if you had prosecutorial experience as well as some type of experience on the defense side taking these independent contract cases.
I think we have a very unique situation of a team that works together, and it’s a male and female team, me being the female attorney. I think that that uniquely positions us to have a female perspective. If you’re dealing with a child victim or a female victim, in questioning them in front of the jury, beating them up or being questioned about some of this subject area by a male makes everyone uncomfortable. I think having a female perspective, a female be able to do that type of interaction is extremely unique and extremely helpful in handling of these types of cases.
Florida’s drug laws are very harsh. Our sentencing guidelines as it relates to drug charges result in mandatory minimum sentencing where a person may not even realize that they are at risk for that level of punishment. They have a situation where they have a prescription amount of some type of opiate, and that would result in many, many years of a mandatory minimum sentence. What a mandatory minimum sentence means is that, if they’re convicted, there is no discretion, and they’re looking at years based upon that weight in prison.
The charge of trafficking in drugs is talked about, thrown around. Many people hear that word trafficking, and they assume that that means that you are moving around large quantities of weight. Often, it gives the impression like a TV or a movie that you’re transporting across state lines. You’re engaged in a big type of operation involving sales.
In the state of Florida, trafficking can be determined or can be proven based purely on weight. You can have just about 30 Percocet pills, which is a month prescription for some, and that weight alone will subject you to trafficking. What people often don’t know is that, a Percocet pill, the amount of opiate that’s contained in that pill is really very small. There’s fillers in all of these pills, a Tylenol or acetaminophen to fill that, and that entire pill’s weight gets counted. I think people on the street that are getting a prescription amount that they’re using for personal use, they’re not necessarily engaged in any type of sale or trafficking, are maybe not aware of how serious the state of Florida punishes those types of crimes.
I don’t want to give the impression that it is the only way to do it and that you’re really jeopardized or at risk of losing something if you’re not the first to file, but I do think being the first to file has its benefits. If you are not the first to file and you’re the respondent, you have to be served with that petition. I think for anybody, receiving service of process and being served by a processor where just like you see on TV, you’ve been served and all that, it just gives you not the greatest feeling. It makes you defensive.
Additionally, I think Florida law creates a situation that exacerbates that feeling, and that’s because when a petition for a divorce is – or dissolution of marriage is filed in the state of Florida, you need to plead in that petition anything that you may need or even if it’s in the future and you’re not actually seeking that. Let’s say, for example, you’re not seeking alimony at this point in time but there could be a situation that later you would seek that. You need to include that in your initial filing. Even if it’s something that once the attorneys all get involved and you start working the matter out, you’re going to say, listen, I don’t actually want that. It’s just there because later, if there’s some issue that creates a situation that I need that, the law requires that it’s there.
Civilians, people that are going through the situation don’t understand that, and it creates contention. They see and read this document. It has all these demands on it. It’s like we didn’t talk about you wanting this. Why are you doing that?
People don’t know, so I think, if you’re the first to file, the balls in your court from the beginning. You know what to expect. You’ve had the opportunity to speak to an attorney and be educated about the process. You don’t need to have those feelings, and you don’t, hopefully, need to create that type of contention.
At Farkas & Crowley, we really try and stress to our clients that making the divorce or the dissolution process as amicable as possible is in everybody’s best interest. The only people that win or gain from making it contentious and fighting back and forth are really the attorneys through attorney’s fees. It’s hard. It’s emotional, but it’s important to try and keep those emotions down and keep those defensive feelings down. I do think being the first to file makes that maybe easier. You know it’s coming. It’s not like a hard pill to swallow.
Florida’s 10-20-Life statute deals with when guns and firearms are possessed or used during the commission of felonies. I think there’s a misnomer that 10-20-Life had something to do with priors, and if you commit one crime, it’s 10. If you commit 2, it’s 20 and such and such. That’s not what it means in Florida. I believe, in California, there may be something similar to that, and that’s where the confusion has come from. In Florida, it has nothing to do with your prior criminal history. It has nothing to do whether you are a felon.
What it means is the 10-20-Life is 10 is for possession of a firearm during the commission, meaning that if you just possessed a firearm, never used it, never have to pull it out. It was found to be on you or in close enough proximity that it’s deemed possessed during a felony, meaning you go into a home and attempt to steal a PlayStation, of video games, or something like that from – this happens with, unfortunately, younger defendants not realizing how serious these crimes are. They have a firearm in their backpack or in their waistband, don’t display that firearm, don’t even make contact with the person in the home, but they’re found to have committed this burglary. No one’s in the house, but they had a gun on them, go out and take it. They are facing a mandatory minimum of 10 years based on that possession of a firearm while committing that crime.
The 20 years of the 10-20-Life statute deals with if that firearm is discharged during the commission of a crime, so it could be for something like a – not intended to shoot at somebody but a warning shot or the firearm goes off. If the firearm is discharged during the commission of any crime, you’re looking at a mandatory minimum of 20 years. The life is really a 25 to life, and that is if you shoot somebody. If there is contact made, an injury, you’re looking at a mandatory minimum of 25 to life.
No. I think that that’s a very common misunderstanding about the law. Everybody hears that the second that you’re placed in those handcuffs or you’re placed under arrest that the next thing that the police officer should do is read those Miranda rights. Often times, it happens that way because it’s best practice if an officer is going to ask questions.
Basically, the purpose of your Miranda rights is with regard to any custodial interrogation, meaning that once you’re in custody, not free to leave, not necessarily in handcuffs but in a situation where one would feel that they’re not free to leave and walk away from a police officer or a group of police officers, and they begin asking you questions, questions that could lead to incriminating evidence, that could illicit an incriminating response. That’s really what your Miranda rights deal with is your right to remain silent. I mean, that’s what everybody hears.
If a police officer knows that they’re just putting you under arrest and they’re going to stay completely quiet; they’re not going to ask you any questions, they do not have to Mirandize you. If you’re sitting in the back of a police car—we see this a lot—all of that is recorded. There’s recording going on in the back of the police car, and you’ll hear people in the back just yapping away saying different things, being argumentative with the police officers, making different statements. All of those statements can be used against that person, even without having been read Miranda, as long as that police officer did not ask a question or did not do anything to elicit that answer.
You’ll hear it phrased as a spontaneous statement or a spontaneous utterance, that the defendant spontaneously said such and such. That’s to trigger or give the indication that it wasn’t based on a law enforcement question. It wasn’t interrogation. The need for Miranda never came into play.
Your Miranda rights really don’t have all that much to do with arrest. They have to do with interrogation, and another important thing to note about that is you could find yourself in a situation where Miranda should have been read. You were never actually under arrest, but a person similarly situated, a reasonable person that was in your situation would feel that they had to option but to speak to the police, or they had no right to walk away and leave.
The most common types of situations where the case law really supports that is really dealing with situations where there’s a lot of law enforcement around. There’s some type of feeling that you can’t leave. An example of which might if they ask for your identification and they’re still in possession of your document, so you can’t leave. You’re not going to leave until somebody gives you your things back.
I’m not going to get into it, but there’s various examples of those types of situations where you’re not technically under arrest but you’re in a custodial situation. It’s just important to note. You’ll get those phone calls where people will say I was arrested. Nobody read me Miranda or nobody read me my rights. I’m going to get off this case.
That’s not true. That’s not what triggers Miranda. If in fact an arrest occurs and Miranda should have been read or your rights to remain silent should have been noted because they were going to ask you questions, the only thing that would then happen is that they would be precluded from using those statement later, but it would not mean that your case is getting thrown away. It would not mean the entire arrest gets thrown away.
By the nature of just being pulled over for a traffic stop, absolutely not. In order to have the right to search the vehicle, there would have to be something that gives them a reasonable suspicion of another type of crime. The most common that you hear of and see of is going to be the odor of marijuana. That’s an interesting topic being that marijuana is becoming more and more legal and marijuana cards. Then when you’re driving, if you’re using marijuana, that could still be the potential for a driving under the influence type of charge.
There has been some thought about how the legality of marijuana may change that. However, I’m using that as an example to show that, if you’re pulled over for any normal routine type of traffic stop and an officer claims to smell the odor of marijuana, he can use that as a basis to search your vehicle. There’s also situations where odors lead them to request a call out for a canine or a drug dog that can do a sniff. That’s an interesting issue as well because sometimes you can be sitting waiting for some time for a police officer that has a drug dog to show up, so there’s different analysis of the law of how long is a reasonable amount of time that you should have to sit on the side of the road. There’s no clear-cut answer to that, but I’m just using it as an example to show that there has to be more than just the traffic stop before an officer can ask to search your car.
Now, I don’t want to give the impression that they can’t ask you to voluntarily consent to the search of the vehicle. They can. As a defense attorney, it would be my advice to refuse that. However, they are legally allowed to ask you, and if you consent to that search, then it’s fine. You voluntarily allowed them to consent, but a forced search would require reasonable suspicion of another type of crime having been committed.
I practice criminal defense because I love my clients and I like to keep the government in check. Criminal defense is a horrible, horrible business model. If I was in it for the money, we would sue people. Think about the catch-22. Ninety percent of people commit crimes because they don’t have anything. The kids that are on the block, it’s because they don’t have a chance, so 90% of people that are possessing the drugs and getting arrested, they’re poor. Here this person gets arrested and criminal defense would expect them to have thousands of dollars liquid to pay our services. Had they had those thousands of dollars liquid, they wouldn’t have committed the crime in the first place, so it’s a very horrible catch-22 for a business model.
We do criminal defense because we see how terrible our system is. We see how much our rights are violated every day. I’m not one of these true believers, but what people don’t understand is US – the United States isn’t part of the [01:05] Convention. We’re not part of the international courts, and there’s a reason for that. It’s because our Bureau of Prisons and just our everyday criminal justice system is considered inhumane and barbaric. Other countries do not use solitary confinement the way we do. They do not lock people up and not let them have family contact except through a screen.
It’s gotten so bad of what goes on in the prisons that it’s considered almost barbaric of some of things that go on in our jails and prisons. Come to find out, most of those things are just normal policies and procedures. Oh, you curse at a deputy, 60 days in the hole with no human contact, nothing to – no magazines, no books, nothing to keep your mind straight. You got to believe the – and understand the damage that gets done on an individual basis for somebody sitting in custody who is in the hole for 60 days with nothing to do. You see the deterioration. You see how much it changes a person overall.
It’s amazing the statistics if you know that, if somebody is incarcerated, even in the local jail, for 10 days or more, their recidivism rate goes up about 70%. Their life is usually completely thrown off track. The people are arrested. They can’t pay their rent if they’re in custody for 10 days. They lose their car. They lose their home. What they experience by being incarcerated for 10 days they find completely changes a person. They found that that is – that’s a significant deadline they notice in getting people out on bond or anything like that. They have determined that just 10 days in jail will completely alter that person’s life.
Farkas & Crowley really became pretty well known in all the jails and in the neighborhoods for handling very serious crimes. We got known that way by we had an independent contract our first year of Farkas & Crowley with the Office of Regional Conflict Counsel. What that is, it’s like a public defender’s office. When there’s a conflict of interest, what if they want to plead out against each other? There’s a conflict of interest, so any case that has two defendants or anything, the next case goes through the Office of Regional Conflict Counsel. It’s a government agency, but we were hired as independent contractors.
That contract allowed us to cover an entire felony division, so we had everything from first degree murder all the way down to simple grand theft. In a year, we tried more serious felony cases than any other firm and, actually, more than any public defenders even tried. We have a full felony division, including sex crimes and homicide. The public defenders who do those cases, they don’t even have a full docket. They just either handle their sex crimes, or they just handle their homicide, or they handle lower-level cases. We have the entire division of cases ranging anywhere from 80 cases at a time to 120. I’m in the jail five times a week talking to different clients.
What also happened is, the division we had to take over, a previous attorney just dumped it over Christmas, and he didn’t do anything with the files. He had not taken – done any trials. We had about two and a half years of cases that were just sitting on trial dockets. At docket call, the judge said no more continuances. We end up having to try back-to-back to back-to-back felonies to get not only the experience but to get the caseload down. At a point in time, I was even picking a jury while waiting for another verdict. That’s how much trials we were doing in the first year, one after another.
Every single trial is completely different. Even if it has the exact same charge, it’ll never be the same way. It’ll have different prosecutors. It’ll have different judges. It’ll have different jurors, and you will learn something new every single case and get better every single case. By now, being 12 years out, we’ve tried hundreds of serious felonies.
There’s a county or a city out in Palm Beach County called Belle Glade. They produce the most NFL players of any city in the world, but that’s the only way they get out. It is completely impoverished. It is poor. It is rural, and it is – has a very high crime rate, as you can imagine. There was attempted murders. Every time somebody shot at somebody else, even without hitting them, attempted murder, attempted murder, attempted murder. We end up trying so many attempted murders with the firearm cases and getting so many not guilties that the firm’s name was in every jail cell for every serious crime.
What ended up happening is we kept getting calls for serious crimes privately and not so much for DUI. You’ll find that about 90% of private defense attorneys really just do DUI and DUSes and lower-level misdemeanors because that’s where the money is. People come in, and it’s a mill, DUIs, DUIs, DUIs, a thousand – even if they don’t make a lot of money, they just do a lot of cases. There’s really no stress. They may go to trial one, two times a year, and it’s a DUI. Most private defense attorneys you’ll find won’t do 10 felony trials in a 5-year basis.
We continue to be known as an aggressive firm. We continue to have more trials cases on dockets than most other firms because of how aggressive we are. The flipside of that is, being known about being so aggressive, we end up getting better plea offers at the last minute. When we’re ready to bring a jury in, the state can see we’re not going to fold. We’re actually not going to accept the plea offer, and then, at the last minute, boom, boom, boom, wow, they really lowered to what we were looking for 12 months ago. While my client was sitting in custody, we could’ve wrapped this case up, but because the state dragged it out and I guess tries to play chicken sometimes, we’re very well known. It ends up helping plea offers too, so it doesn’t mean just hire us for trial because we’re great. We are, but it also ends up resulting in better plea deals than would normally be found.
A few years back, we had a pretty interesting case. We got hired by someone who will remain nameless, but he was from Texas. He was an older guy in his 50’s. He worked for Lockheed Martin building the Black Hawk helicopters, no criminal history or anything. It was around Christmastime, and he was getting ready to go home to do a hunt with his family for Christmas. He had his stuff on his bed, but that night, before he was leaving the following day, he – they were having a little bit of a get-together at his own house, his little condo pool, with the neighbors he knows and everybody. He’s there that night and everybody’s drinking, having a good time.
Obviously, he ends up having a little bit too much to drink, and so he thinks it’s funny when – he goes back to his condo. He gets his rifle. It’s not loaded, and he puts Christmas deer antlers on the front. He goes out naked with his rifle. Completely joking but waving it around to the point where some neighbors got really scared and freaked out. He’s plastered at this time, and they end up calling the police.
Two police officers show up that are clearly inexperienced, so what they do is they are screaming at it him to put the gun down. Meanwhile, the gun is already on the ground, and he’s just walking around naked. He comes closer to them and is standing over the rifle. They both scream, “Put it down.” Yet, it’s already down.
They both panic, and they shoot him numerous times, both of them. These two officers both shoot him numerous times, and neither one could tell me how many times they shot. What was funny is both of them testified that the gun was pointed at me when I fired, and the partner said the gun was pointed at me when I fired. The jury took that as, well, it can’t be pointed in both places, and they clearly panicked.
Here’s what ended up happening. There was also the other people at the apartment who were alleged victims, so they claim that the rifle was pointed at them and all this and all that. What ends up happening is he ends up getting arrested. He ends up being held in jail until his trial because he is charged with six counts of attempted first degree murder with a firearm and two counts of aggravated assault with a firearm on a law enforcement officer. What that did was it gave him minimum mandatories, as you can imagine. He didn’t fire his gun.
Each minimum mandatory, though, was 3 years so 3, 6, 9, 12, no criminal history. He had about 21 years minimum mandatory that he was facing if he went to trial. State attorney’s office offers him nine years in prison. This is a man who has never done anything wrong in his life. He has high security clearance from building Black Hawk helicopters. He’s in his 50s. He got shot numerous times.
It was one of those cases where we had to tell the client, listen, we got to just knuckle up and go to trial. Our trial strategy was, obviously, he was out there drunk doing stupid things and there was a gun out there. There’s a charge, improper exhibition of a weapon or a firearm, and that is a first-degree misdemeanor. Our strategy was we’ll go in there, and we get to admit guilt. We get credibility from the jury.
We say you know what? We’re here today because he was stupid. What did he do? He improperly exhibited his gun or firearm. It’s exactly why we have that statute, and you’ll notice in your jury packet form that it’s a lesser included offense.
We are accepting responsibility that this is what he did. He was guilty of improper exhibition of a weapon, and that’s what he should be found guilty for but not the attempted murders that have premeditation or had 10-20-Life attached. After some deliberation, sure enough, the jury comes back not guilty on the AGG assault on the firearm with the officers because their testimony did not match up at all and improper exhibition of a weapon on the six other counts. Obviously, that’s a one-year misdemeanor, so the state attorney thinks, okay, well, at least I’ll get six years.
When we get to sentencing, little did they know that improper exhibition of a weapon has no victims, so there’s no alleged victims. For the same incident, you can’t have six charges. The court was then forced to dismiss five out of the six charges, and he’s left with one misdemeanor, improper exhibition of a weapon, time served. The judge had to release him.
As you can imagine, most cases in criminal law, there’s two kinds of evidence. There’s testimonial evidence that comes from witnesses, and then there’s physical evidence that comes from DNA, fingerprints, photos, blood, things that are concrete. Physical evidence is much harder for a defense attorney to convince a jury of if there’s physical evidence tying a defendant to the scene.
We had a case where there was a home invasion robbery where it was four black males that were masked and hooded and gloved. They take the alleged victim in and put him in the trunk and tie him up. His mouth is covered with duct tape, and they take him somewhere. He doesn’t get hurt, but they take him in his car and drop him off somewhere. He couldn’t describe them because they were masked. He didn’t know who they were, so there was really nothing for the police to go on.
When the CSI ran all the stuff through their program, they found one thumbprint from my alleged client on the piece of duct tape that was around the alleged victim’s mouth. That was the only thing they had. They didn’t have anything else putting my client on scene. What I did was I practiced with the roll of duct tape that they said – like normal roll of duct tape. I kept practicing, so when I showed the jury how I could tear it off, actually, I could’ve been using that piece before. It was just still left on the duct tape later, and so when they maybe got the supplies or they got it out of someone’s garage or back of their car seat, my client may have just been using that duct tape before.
We were able to at least convince the jury that maybe his thumbprint was there before, and there’s nothing else tying him. After a long deliberation, they came back of my client not guilty, and he was free to go.
For the first five to seven years, we only did criminal, completely. We were starting to get more calls about horrible things that were happening in family court to our clients who we had or their family members. There were horrific stories about what the lawyers did to them or what – a lot of it I couldn’t believe, but then, when I started to see the quantity of lawyers that were just taking advantage of clients – they’re vulnerable in family law. You guys come to us, and it’s one of the biggest issues in your life that you’re going to go through, a divorce or a child custody. It’s your family. It’s the second most important thing to your freedom.
When I started to see how terrible it was, we decided to start helping clients, and we started getting more and more clients to the point where we were helping them when DCF was trying to take their kids away from them, or a really vicious lawyer was trying to take advantage of somebody who can’t afford $10,000 for a lawyer or $15,000 for a lawyer. You should understand, in family law, if it’s not the government, you’re not entitled to a lawyer. It’s not like people get – go in there and a lawyer’s going to help you in a divorce with your husband who has the money or your ex-spouse who could afford it and you can’t. What we try to do is we try to figure out a way where we could help them. We’re keeping our cost much lower, so we brought in a special paralegal. Her hourly rate is way lower, but also, what we did was we saw how much easier it would be if one party would be reasonable and have client control.
Florida has very specific statutory guidelines for child custody, child support, time sharing. It’s pretty much statutory, so if two attorneys are reasonable, there’s no reason why the case shouldn’t be easily worked out in mediation. However, attorneys totally go off the end telling their clients that they can get this and that when they know they’re never going to get it. We end up doing mediation and deliberating and going back and forth to court for 12, 18 months, and all we are doing as lawyers is taking the food from the children. We don’t do that. Even when they start asking for attorney’s fees and they say, well, I have $43,000 in attorney’s fees and – so they ask our client, well, what have you paid your attorney? Our client’s like, well, I think $11,000 or 12.
We’ve allowed them to get good representation for a fair value of what our hourly rates can work. The attorneys are still terrible, but at least we have grown it so much that we feel like we’re at least helping our clients get through it without losing their home and losing their ability to pay for their groceries while their family law case is going on and don’t add to their stress. That’s why we really added it to our firm.
Looking for a criminal law firm? Farkas & Crowley, P.A. are the attorneys for you. They are extremely knowledgeable of the law and go the extra mile for their clients. Their expertise and impeccable work ethic are hard to beat. Available 24/7. Highly recommended.
-Marla Newman
500 S. Australian Ave.
6th Floor
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(561) - 444 - 9529
Mon - Fri: 9 am – 5 pm
The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. No content on this site may be reused in any fashion without written permission from criminal defense attorneys at Law Office of Farkas & Crowley, P.A.
The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. No content on this site may be reused in any fashion without written permission from criminal defense attorneys at Law Office of Farkas & Crowley, P.A.
