Thomas represents individuals and organizations under investigation or prosecution in federal and state courts. Along with the other attorneys at Rubio, Rubio, & Rubio, Thomas defends clients who seek counsel with complex litigation issues involving complex fraud, loan fraud, healthcare fraud, Ponzi schemes, money laundering, narcotics possession and trafficking, international criminal defense, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and a variety of other criminal matters.
Prior to joining Rubio, Rubio, & Rubio, Thomas worked as a litigation associate for two large law firms, including an Am Law 100 national law firm with an office in Miami, Florida. As a litigation associate, Thomas worked on behalf of clients with commercial, criminal, and civil legal matters. Before that, Thomas served as a judicial extern for U. S. Magistrate Judge John J. O’Sullivan. During college, Thomas interned for Judge Diane Ward on Florida’s Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court.
Below are a few select representative matters that Thomas has been involved in:
DOCTOR CHARGED WITH 22 COUNTS OF HEALTHCARE/MEDICARE FRAUD – NOT GUILTY AFTER TWO-WEEK JURY TRIAL:
Thomas was part of the defense team that went to trial in Federal Court on behalf of a prominent South Florida doctor charged with 22 counts of Healthcare/Medicare Fraud. The Government alleged the doctor, at each of his several office locations, falsified diagnoses and treatments of patients in an alleged scheme to make money. In support of its case, the Government introduced testimony from ocular oncology experts from the Cleveland Clinic and Bascom Palmer to assert that the doctor treated non-existent tumors in patients’ eyes. During trial, Thomas conducted the direct examination of the defense team’s expert to refute the claims of the Government and its experts by first confirming the presence of tumors, and then educating the jury that the doctor’s treatments were proper. After a two-week trial, the 12-member jury rendered a verdict acquitting the doctor on all 22 counts in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
POSSESSION OF CONTRABAND ABOARD VESSEL – COMPANION CASES DISMISSED:
Thomas drafted and successfully argued motions to dismiss in two separate cases for a captain and a crew member accused of possessing contraband aboard a vessel that was stopped by authorities in Miami, Florida. The State brought charges against both individuals in two separate cases relying on a theory of constructive possession of the contraband. At the hearings for the motions to dismiss, Thomas argued that the State’s theory of constructive possession was in conflict with case law from the Third District Court of Appeals. After oral argument, the Court dismissed both cases brought by the State against both the captain and crew member.
DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) – CHARGES DROPPED BY THE STATE:
Thomas drafted a motion to suppress and motion to dismiss on behalf of a client who was charged with driving under the influence. The State brought charges against the individual after the individual gave several statements, failed field sobriety tests, and consented to a breathalyzer test. Thomas argued in both motions that the officers seized the client before he gained actual physical control of his vehicle. Therefore, citing case law from both the United States Supreme Court and the Florida Supreme Court, Thomas argued the State could not prove the Defendant was in actual physical control of his vehicle when the officers seized him. Upon reading the motions, the State agreed to drop the charges against the client.
Prior to joining Rubio, Rubio, & Rubio, Thomas worked as a litigation associate for two large law firms, including an Am Law 100 national law firm with an office in Miami, Florida. As a litigation associate, Thomas worked on behalf of clients with commercial, criminal, and civil legal matters. Before that, Thomas served as a judicial extern for U. S. Magistrate Judge John J. O’Sullivan. During college, Thomas interned for Judge Diane Ward on Florida’s Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court.
Below are a few select representative matters that Thomas has been involved in:
DOCTOR CHARGED WITH 22 COUNTS OF HEALTHCARE/MEDICARE FRAUD – NOT GUILTY AFTER TWO-WEEK JURY TRIAL:
Thomas was part of the defense team that went to trial in Federal Court on behalf of a prominent South Florida doctor charged with 22 counts of Healthcare/Medicare Fraud. The Government alleged the doctor, at each of his several office locations, falsified diagnoses and treatments of patients in an alleged scheme to make money. In support of its case, the Government introduced testimony from ocular oncology experts from the Cleveland Clinic and Bascom Palmer to assert that the doctor treated non-existent tumors in patients’ eyes. During trial, Thomas conducted the direct examination of the defense team’s expert to refute the claims of the Government and its experts by first confirming the presence of tumors, and then educating the jury that the doctor’s treatments were proper. After a two-week trial, the 12-member jury rendered a verdict acquitting the doctor on all 22 counts in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
POSSESSION OF CONTRABAND ABOARD VESSEL – COMPANION CASES DISMISSED:
Thomas drafted and successfully argued motions to dismiss in two separate cases for a captain and a crew member accused of possessing contraband aboard a vessel that was stopped by authorities in Miami, Florida. The State brought charges against both individuals in two separate cases relying on a theory of constructive possession of the contraband. At the hearings for the motions to dismiss, Thomas argued that the State’s theory of constructive possession was in conflict with case law from the Third District Court of Appeals. After oral argument, the Court dismissed both cases brought by the State against both the captain and crew member.
DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (DUI) – CHARGES DROPPED BY THE STATE:
Thomas drafted a motion to suppress and motion to dismiss on behalf of a client who was charged with driving under the influence. The State brought charges against the individual after the individual gave several statements, failed field sobriety tests, and consented to a breathalyzer test. Thomas argued in both motions that the officers seized the client before he gained actual physical control of his vehicle. Therefore, citing case law from both the United States Supreme Court and the Florida Supreme Court, Thomas argued the State could not prove the Defendant was in actual physical control of his vehicle when the officers seized him. Upon reading the motions, the State agreed to drop the charges against the client.