Dom Soto's trials read like a Who's Who of the cases brought within the Southern District of Alabama. They include: United States v. Marino (See United States v. Diaz in the list of reported cases), United States v. Starkes, United States v. Lynn (United States v. Eyster, 948 F.2d 1196 (11th Cir. 1991), United States v. Leon, United States v. Garcia, United States v. Barros, (United States v. Costa, 31 F.3d 1073 (11th Cir. 1994) and United States v. Ly (prosecuted in the Northern District of Florida).
In Leon, a case that was intertwined with the infamous Barry Seal, Soto had become aware of and began exposing the excesses of the United States Customs Service and its undercover special operations plan, "Operation Skymaster." Soto was Mobile's answer to Mark Lane, claiming that there was a shadow government employing criminals, paying them huge sums of money and condoning all sorts of questionable acts. By Marino Soto's "paranoia" was proven right. In that case, he was recognized by a federal trial judge as "the expert on Skymaster."
Lynn was a massive cocaine case involving literally 16 tons of cocaine and argued by the best lawyers in the country. Soto's client was acquitted. While waiting on the jury in that case he tried another case. Both verdicts of acquittal coming within hours of each other. In Lynn all Soto had needed to do was stay out of the way and let the big dogs fight. It had been like a forty-day training course with the best lawyers in the country, including Roy Black.
Fresh from the Lynn case, he carried what he had learned from the superstars into Garcia, again confronting the brazen excesses of the "scalawags and miscreants of Operation Skymaster". It was in that case that Soto became convinced (and was beginning to convince others, including a federal judge) that the government needed to be reined in. As if anyone needed any proof, also in that case, the FBI unsuccessfully attempted a sting of the law firm by sending agents to offer the partners a bribe. (See "Bring Me The Head of Alfredo Garcia's Lawyers")
Check out our Press Clippings Section for some news accounts of some of our cases or Dom's Bio.
United States v. Perez-Oliveros, 479 F.3d 779
(11th Cir. 2007)
United States v. Frye, 402 F.3d 1123 (11th Cir. 2005)
Wallace v. Morrison, 87 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir.1996)
United States v. Diaz, 26 F.3d 1533 (11th Cir. 1994)
United States v. Rodriguez, 935 F.2d 194 (11th Cir.1991)
United States v. Rodriguez, 917 F.2d 1286 (11th Cir. 1990)
Dailey v. State, 828 So.2d 340 (Ala. 2001)
Ex parte Andrews, 736 So.2d 595 (Ala. 1999)
Armstead v. State, 659 So.2d 188 (Ala.Crim.App. 1994)
Ex parte Manning, 612 So.2d 1267 (Ala. 1993)
Ware v. State, 949 So.2d 169 (Ala.Crim.App. 2006)
Sims v. State, 869 So.2d 1181 (Ala.Crim.App. 2003)
Dailey v. State, 828 So.2d 344 (Ala.Crim.App. 2002)
Dailey v. State, 828 So.2d 337 (Ala.Crim.App. 2000)
Little v. State, 739 So.2d 539 (Ala.Crim.App. 1998)
Maddox v. State, 708 So.2d 220 (Ala.Crim.App. 1997)
Craig v. State, 616 So.2d 366 (Ala.Crim.App. 1993)
Kauffman v. State, 620 So.2d 90 (Ala.Crim.App. 1992)
Manning v. State, 612 So.2d 1262 (Ala.Crim.App. 1992)
O'Cain v. State, 586 So.2d 34 (Ala.Crim.App. 1991)
Craig v. State, 616 So.2d 364 (Ala.Crim.App. 1992)
Jackson v. State, 570 So.2d 874 (Ala.Crim.App. 1990)
Clark v. State, 562 So.2d 620 (Ala.Crim.App. 1989)
Henry v. State, 555 So.2d 768 (Ala.Crim.App. 1989 )
Ex parte Personnel Bd. for Mobile County, 637 So.2d 888 (Ala. 1994)
City of Mobile Water Service System v. Smith, 637 So.2d 889 (Ala.Civ.App. 1994)
City of Mobile Water Service System v. Smith, 637 So.2d 885 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993)
Wood v. President and Trustees of Spring Hill College in City of Mobile, 978 F.2d 1214 (11th Cir.1992)
Soto image in hyperlink appeared as a J.D. Crowe editorial cartoon in the Mobile Press-Register.