Same RICO Headline. A Different Client Record.
Operation On the Fence placed 14 defendants beneath one highly publicized, $20 million RICO narrative. This companion case study concerns a separate client from the same prosecution. The public record attributed a narrower, supporting role to the client. The racketeering charge was not pursued, and the two remaining third-degree felony counts ended with adjudication withheld and concurrent probation.
No action taken by the prosecutor on the racketeering charge. [8]
Adjudication withheld on both remaining third-degree felonies. [7][8]
Concurrent probation rather than a prison sentence. [7][8]
One operation did not mean one defendant story
Royal Palm Investigations’ earlier Operation On the Fence case study involved a different defendant, a different charge history, and a different outcome. This case began under the same public announcement, but it has to be read from its own client-specific record.
In October 2023, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody and several law-enforcement agencies announced Operation On the Fence as the conclusion of a large organized-retail-theft investigation. The State said the alleged enterprise operated in at least nine judicial circuits, affected more than 20 retailers, and caused more than $20 million in losses. Fourteen defendants were charged. [1]
The announcement was built for public attention. Officials described a multi-level system of alleged “boosters,” distributors, warehouses, transportation, and online sales. The Attorney General’s release said an Amazon storefront known as Hollywoodseller generated more than $5 million in sales during 2023, that more than 100,000 items had been shipped to Amazon, and that law enforcement seized more than $1.2 million in merchandise. [1]
Television and online coverage repeated the size and language of the announcement. One report quoted the Attorney General describing the alleged organization as a “modern day mafia.” Local coverage showed officials at press conferences with retailers and law-enforcement partners, discussing a roughly 200-page probable-cause affidavit and the broader costs of organized retail theft. [2][3]
By the time the client’s individual case began moving through court, the public story was already enormous.
The public announcement described the operation as a whole
The public heard about millions of dollars in alleged losses, nearly 90 identified serial shoplifters, national retailers, seized pallets, an Amazon storefront, multiple counties, and a coordinated law-enforcement operation. [1][2][3]
The case was publicly framed before it was litigated
Operation On the Fence received broad media attention. These reports show how the statewide RICO and organized-retail-theft narrative was presented to the public when the charges were announced.
- NBC 6 South Florida — “14 Facing Charges in $20 Million Retail Theft Ring Busted in Miami-Dade”
- WPTV — “‘Operation On the Fence’ Nets 14 South Florida Suspects in $20 Million Retail Theft Case”
- CBS12 / WPEC — “Busted: 14 Charged in Massive $20 Million South Florida Retail Theft Ring”
- Yahoo / USA Today Network — “14 Charged in ‘Simple Shoplifting’ Case That Became 3-County Racketeering Investigation”
- WIOD / iHeart — “‘Operation On the Fence’ Shuts Down Statewide Shoplifting Ring”
These reports describe allegations and official statements made when the case was announced. They are not judicial findings and are not independent findings by Royal Palm Investigations.
One person still had to be judged on their own conduct
A racketeering case can place many people beneath one headline. It does not make every allegation against the enterprise an allegation against every defendant.
That distinction mattered here.
The client was not publicly described as one of the alleged “boosters” whom investigators accused of repeatedly entering stores and stealing merchandise. The arrest-warrant affidavit instead categorized the client as a “First Level Fence Employee.” It alleged that they performed data entry, invoicing, inventory work, and packaging for shipment. The affidavit expressly stated that the client did not transport merchandise to Miami. Contemporary reporting likewise described the client as an alleged employee of the first-level distributor, not as one of the people portrayed as professional or serial shoplifters. [4][5]
Those were serious allegations. They were still allegations, and they described a different claimed role from the conduct attributed to the alleged organizers, distributors, and serial thieves.
The public record presents the client as an individual alleged to have occupied a supporting role—not as one of the alleged organizers or serial shoplifters—who was suddenly placed inside an extraordinary, highly publicized RICO prosecution. Their individual allegations, charges, and ultimate disposition therefore must be separated from the broader enterprise narrative.
What investigators attributed to the client
According to the arrest-warrant affidavit, investigators alleged that the client performed data entry, invoicing, inventory-related work, and packaging at the first-level distributor’s location. Investigators said body-worn-camera footage showed the client doing data entry and preparing items for shipment on July 24, 2023, and conducting inventory and data entry on August 16, 2023. The affidavit also described a client-specific text exchange about leaving headphones at a residence; investigators reported that the headphones were later located there during a search. [5]
The affidavit sought four felony charges against the client:
- Racketeering;
- Conspiracy to commit racketeering;
- Dealing in stolen property; and
- Unlawful use of a two-way communications device. [5][6]
This list states what investigators and prosecutors alleged at the beginning. It is not a list of findings made after trial, and it is not the final disposition.
A press conference tells the story of an operation. A defense must examine one person at a time.
The government’s public presentation explained how it believed the overall enterprise worked. The client’s case required a different examination:
- What conduct was actually attributed to the client?
- Which communications involved the client, and what did those communications establish?
- Which merchandise, transactions, locations, and dates could be tied to them?
- What was alleged against other defendants but repeated publicly as part of the same operation?
- Which original charges were ultimately pursued?
That is the central difficulty in a large conspiracy or racketeering case. The scale of the alleged enterprise can overshadow the evidence concerning a person with a far narrower alleged role.
The public record can show the result without exposing the defense file
Royal Palm Investigations assisted defense counsel in the client’s case. To protect the client and the integrity of the defense relationship, this case study does not disclose confidential communications, investigative assignments, witness development, strategy, work product, or information learned only through the engagement.
The public record is sufficient to show the central point: the client entered the case beneath the same statewide RICO headline as the alleged organizers and serial thieves, but their charges and final disposition had to be assessed separately.
From public announcement to individual disposition
October 2023 – Operation On the Fence announced
The Attorney General and law-enforcement partners announced a 14-defendant case involving alleged losses exceeding $20 million across at least nine judicial circuits and more than 20 retailers. Media reports repeated the State’s organized-crime framing and the description “modern day mafia.” [1][2][3]
Initial case – four felony allegations
The arrest-warrant affidavit and original public case record reflected racketeering, conspiracy to commit racketeering, dealing in stolen property, and unlawful use of a two-way communications device. [5][6]
November 9, 2023 – the original charges were restructured
The original court record shows that the racketeering and two-way-communications-device counts were consolidated into a later case. It marks the original conspiracy-to-racketeer and dealing-in-stolen-property counts “No Action Taken by Prosecutor.” The operative docket also marks its racketeering count “No Action Taken by Prosecutor.” Each of those disposition entries is dated November 9, 2023. [6][8]
August 18, 2026 – guilty pleas, withheld adjudication, and concurrent probation
The client entered guilty pleas to conspiracy to commit dealing in stolen property and unlawful use of a two-way communications device. Both were third-degree felonies. The court withheld adjudication on both and imposed 24 months of probation, with the terms running concurrently. [7][8]
The final court record was not the press-conference narrative
The client was not acquitted, and the remaining charges did not disappear. They entered guilty pleas to two third-degree felony counts and received probation subject to the court’s conditions. [7][8]
But the distinctions matter:
- The racketeering charge was not prosecuted. [8]
- The conspiracy-to-racketeer allegation did not become part of the final disposition. [6][8]
- The two charges that remained were third-degree felonies, not RICO counts. [7][8]
- The court withheld adjudication on both counts. [8]
- The sentences were two concurrent years of probation, not prison. [7][8]
The case began with the client publicly associated with an alleged $20 million statewide enterprise. It ended without an adjudication of guilt on either remaining felony and without a prison sentence.
What that result means – and what it does not mean
Withholding adjudication is a distinct Florida disposition. Here, the client pleaded guilty, but the court did not enter a formal adjudication of guilt on either count. It was not an acquittal and it was not a dismissal. The plea, sentence, and case record still exist. [7][8][9]
The distinction is meaningful. Florida law restricts when a judge may withhold adjudication in felony cases. A court may not withhold adjudication for a capital, life, or first-degree felony, and the statute places additional limits on second-degree and some third-degree felonies. The two counts remaining in the client’s case were third-degree felonies, and the court withheld adjudication on both. [8][9]
The safest public description is precise: the client was not formally adjudicated guilty of the two remaining felony offenses. A withhold should not be described as an acquittal, an expungement, or a finding that the conduct did not occur. It is nevertheless different from a judgment formally adjudicating the person guilty.
Because the court withheld adjudication rather than formally adjudicating the client guilty, the disposition may preserve their eligibility to seek court-ordered sealing after completing probation and all other court supervision. Sealing is not automatic. It requires an FDLE Certificate of Eligibility, satisfaction of Florida’s statutory requirements, and a court order. If granted, sealing would make the criminal-history record confidential and remove it from ordinary public access, although statutory disclosure and access exceptions would remain. [11][12]
An ordinary person inside an extraordinary case
The scale of Operation On the Fence made for a powerful government announcement. It also created a serious risk: the public could see every person on the presentation board as interchangeable.
They were not.
The public materials distinguished the client from the alleged serial shoplifters and from the people accused of directing the larger operation. The affidavit alleged data entry, invoicing, inventory work, and packaging, and it specifically said the client did not transport merchandise to Miami. The court record then narrowed the case further. That is the more accurate public story – not that the original allegations were insignificant, but that the client’s alleged role and actual disposition were not the same as the full enterprise narrative.
For someone placed into a multi-agency RICO prosecution, the language alone can be overwhelming: racketeering, conspiracy, millions in alleged losses, major retailers, press conferences, seized pallets, Amazon sales, and a “modern day mafia.” The defense process still had to bring the case back to the client-specific evidence.
Large cases demand disciplined individualization
In a multi-defendant prosecution, the government may need to explain the entire alleged organization. Defense counsel needs to know exactly what the evidence proves about one client.
That means separating:
- enterprise-wide allegations from client-specific conduct;
- the conduct of alleged organizers from the acts attributed to an employee or supporting participant;
- press-conference language from admissible evidence;
- investigative theories from final charging decisions; and
- initial exposure from the actual disposition.
The larger the public case, the more important that work becomes. A dramatic headline is not a substitute for a defendant-by-defendant analysis.
Frequently asked questions
What was Operation On the Fence?
Operation On the Fence was a multi-agency organized-retail-theft investigation announced by the Florida Attorney General in October 2023. Officials alleged that the enterprise caused more than $20 million in losses to more than 20 retailers across at least nine judicial circuits. Fourteen defendants were charged. [1]
Was the client accused of being one of the serial shoplifters?
The public records reviewed did not categorize the client as one of the alleged “boosters” accused of repeated retail thefts. The arrest-warrant affidavit described the client as a “First Level Fence Employee” and alleged data entry, invoicing, inventory work, and packaging. It expressly stated that the client did not transport merchandise to Miami. [4][5]
What happened to the racketeering charge?
The operative public docket states “No Action Taken by Prosecutor” for the racketeering count. [8]
What charges remained?
The client pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit dealing in stolen property and unlawful use of a two-way communications device. The plea agreement and court record identify both as third-degree felonies. [7][8] Florida law separately defines unlawful use of a two-way communications device to facilitate or further a felony as a third-degree felony. [10]
What does adjudication withheld mean in Florida?
It means the court did not enter a formal adjudication of guilt. In this case, it followed guilty pleas, so it should not be confused with an acquittal or dismissal. Florida law treats a withhold as a distinct disposition and limits when it may be used in felony cases. [7][8][9]
Did the client go to prison?
No. The negotiated disposition and docket reflect 24 months of probation on each count, running concurrently. [7][8]
Why does individual investigation matter in a RICO or conspiracy case?
Because evidence concerning the alleged enterprise is not automatically evidence of every defendant’s knowledge, intent, or conduct. Defense counsel must isolate the records, communications, witnesses, transactions, and timeline that concern the individual client.
Florida RICO defense investigation for high-exposure cases
Royal Palm Investigations works with criminal defense counsel throughout Florida in serious felony, RICO, conspiracy, and multi-defendant cases. Our role is to test allegations against the actual record, organize complex evidence, and help counsel see where the enterprise narrative and the client-specific proof diverge.
Request a Confidential Consultation
Case-study notice: The defendant is identified only as “the client.” Certain details have been limited to protect confidentiality. Allegations attributed to investigators, prosecutors, public officials, or news reports are not independent findings by Royal Palm Investigations. The disposition is stated from the public court record. Nothing in this case study claims that Royal Palm Investigations alone caused the outcome or guarantees a similar result in another matter.
Public record and media sources
- Florida Attorney General’s Office announcement, Oct. 23, 2023.
- WPTV coverage of Operation On the Fence.
- WIOD/iHeart press-conference coverage, Oct. 23, 2023.
- Palm Beach Post/USA Today Network report syndicated by Yahoo. This report identifies defendants.
- Operation On the Fence arrest-warrant affidavit, Palm Beach County public court record. Allegations only.
- Palm Beach County Clerk, original charges-and-sentences record.
- Plea agreement filed and accepted Aug. 18, 2026.
- Palm Beach County Clerk, operative charges-and-sentences record.
- Florida Statutes § 775.08435, limits on withholding adjudication in felony cases.
- Florida Statutes § 934.215, unlawful use of a two-way communications device.
- Florida Statutes § 943.059, court-ordered sealing of criminal-history records.
- Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Seal and Expunge Frequently Asked Questions.