Articles Posted in Drug Possession

This is an Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree for two counts, and criminal possession of a controlled substance, cocaine possession specifically, in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

A Kings County Cocaine Possession lawyer said that the defendant’s convictions arose from his sale of two vials of crack cocaine to an undercover police officer, and his possession of 24 additional vials of crack cocaine. On appeal, he contends that the People failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, the Court found that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt. The partial discrepancy between the markings on the vials and the description of the markings provided by the People’s witnesses merely presented a question of credibility. Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence prevented is primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses. Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record. Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence. No marijuana was found and no arson was charged.

Continue reading

A Suffolk County Police officer testified that on the sixth of October, he was on patrol in the Mastic/Shirley area in a marked police car without a partner. He testified that while driving westbound in the area of the Shirley Motel. He states that while he was in the parking lot he saw a Mercury pulling out of the motel parking lot. The car made a left turn and headed east on the highway.

The officer passed the Mercury and states that he saw an air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror. The officer turned around in the parking lot of the hotel and put on his lights to pull the vehicle over. The vehicle was driven by the criminal defendant.

Continue reading

The defendant is appealing a judgment made by the Monroe County Court. The judgment found the defendant guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree after he pled guilty to the crime.

Case Background

Continue reading

This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered 3 January 1974, convicting him of criminal possession of a dangerous drug in the third and fourth degrees (two counts each), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

The court affirms judgment.

Continue reading

The defendant is appealing a judgment made in the Supreme Court of New York County. The judgment convicted the defendant of criminal facilitation in the second degree and sentenced him to a term of seven and a half to fifteen years.

Case Facts

Continue reading

This is a petition by the People from an order of the Supreme Court, dated November 10, 1983, in which after a trial, and settled that branch of defendant’s motion to suppress evidence.

The Court ruled reversing the order, the portion of the omnibus motion which seeks to suppress the introduction of physical evidence is denied. The case was reverted to the Supreme Court for further proceedings.

Continue reading

This is a case for judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR that was created by the petitioner, including his June 23, 2010 Affidavit in Support of Order to Show Cause, verified on June 23, 2010 and filed in St. Lawrence County Clerk’s office on July 9, 2010. Petitioner, who is a prisoner at the Riverview Correctional Facility, is stimulating the time calculation connected with his current imprisonment in DOCS custody.

A show cause order was issued by the Court on July 23, 2010 which was received by the respondent who immediately filed his answer with exhibits. The respondent was directed by the court to supplement his answer by including therein his entitlement to parole jail time in order to determine the correct computation of his penalty.

Continue reading

Questions of law are heard by the Supreme Court to determine if a person’s rights have been violated. Many questions of law can arise in a court case starting at jury voir dire. Jury voir dire is the selection process to pick which jurors from a pool of persons who have been called for jury duty will be chosen to sit on any particular jury. Both the defense and the prosecution evaluate the potential jurors and try to choose the people that they believe will be the most favorable to their side of the argument. Either side may use a peremptory challenge to eliminate a juror. However, in the case of Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court held that the “Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids the use of peremptory challenges solely for discriminatory purposes, such as to purposely exclude persons of a particular race from serving on a jury.” Under Batson, there is a three-prong test to determine if the person making the motion has made a prima facie case showing that the other party has used its peremptory challenges for discriminatory purposes.

In one New York case, a defendant was observed by an undercover police officer selling drugs. The undercover officer attempted to purchase drugs from him but was denied. He arrested the subject and in the search incident to arrest the officer found that he was in possession of crack cocaine. The defendant was tried by a jury and convicted. He appealed his conviction because the court “improperly denied him his application pursuant to Batson.”

Continue reading

The defendant in this case has been charged with criminal possession of a controlled substance in the 7th degree. This violates Penal Law section 220.03. The defendant has also been charged with endangering the welfare of a child. The defendant has moved for an order to dismiss the information as facially insufficient and to suppress any tangible property that was seized from him and also have any statements that he has made suppressed as well. Alternatively, the defendant is seeking a Dunaway/Mapp/Huntley hearing.

Case Discussion: Criminal Possession of Controlled Substance

Continue reading

The use of marijuana has become more mainstream over the years as the children of the 1960’s have grown up and had children of their own. The easy availability of the drug and relatively few side effects have made it a popular drug of choice even though it is illegal. The question that the New York state courts are called upon to answer is if there is just cause to punish parents who are occasional users of marijuana like they would any other illegal drug. The New York administration for child services maintains that it should. In 2012, they filed a petition to remove four children from their natural parents as derivatively abused children following the birth of the fourth child. The mother and newborn infant had tested positive for marijuana in the hospital the day that the baby was born. The Administration for child services determined that the child must suffer a birth injury as a result of the drug use.

The Administration for child services does not produce any evidence that the child or other children were abused in any way. The only evidence presented as a requirement to remove the children was that the mother and infant tested positive on a toxicology screening. The mother filed a request to have a summary judgment issued by the court on her behalf.

Continue reading