New York Criminal Lawyer Blog 24/7

Published on: June 15, 2013

Defendant Brings Motion Under CPLR Article 78

by Stephen Bilkis

The petitioner, an inmate at Coxsackie Correctional Facility, has commenced the instant CPLR Article 78 proceeding to review a determination by respondent New York State Board of Parole denying his request for discretionary release. Respondent opposes the petition seeking its dismissal.

Currently, the petitioner is serving an indeterminate prison sentence of 15 years to life upon a plea of guilty to Murder in the second degree. The underlying offense that occurred in 1980 involved the petitioner, in concert with others, robbing a victim at knife-point and then stabbing the victim to death. The petitioner was approximately 20 years old at the time he committed the underlying offense.

Published on: June 1, 2013

Petitioner Granted New Trial Based on Lack of Evidence for Drug Charges

by Stephen Bilkis

The petitioner was arrested and charged with several serious crimes. Some of the charges included attempted criminal possession of drugs in the first degree, kidnapping in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon and attempted robbery in the first degree.

The petitioner was held without bail and was indicted for all of these crimes. He entered a plea of guilty to criminal possession of drugs in the second degree, a class A felony, and to the weapons charge. The judge promised a sentence of nine years to life on the drug charge and five years as a definite term on the gun charge.

Published on: May 29, 2013

New York Appellate Court Discusses Presence of Probable Cause in Drug Case

by Stephen Bilkis

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.

Published on: May 24, 2013

NY Appellate Court Discusses Whether Defendant’s Indictment Should be Dismissed

by Stephen Bilkis

A New York Criminal Lawyer said that, the defendant stands indicted for two counts of sodomy in the third degree, three counts of sodomy in the third degree, and one count of sex abuse in the second degree. The sodomy counts are Class E felonies and the sex abuse count is a Class A misdemeanor. All counts are “statutory” in nature, in that lack of consent is based upon the fact of infancy, of the victim having been 16 years of age at the time of the incidents involving him, the other having been 14 years of age, and lastly, 13 years old.

An Albany Sex Crime Lawyer said that defendant has moved to dismiss the indictment upon the grounds of insufficient legal evidence before the grand jury to corroborate the testimony of the alleged victims as required by Section 130.16 of the Penal Law.

Published on: May 21, 2013

Petitioner Appeals Jury Verdict Regarding Mental Competency

by Stephen Bilkis

A New York Criminal Lawyer said that this is a proceeding that transpired in January 2010 wherein the court presided over a jury trial conducted under Article 10 of the Mental Hygiene Law to determine whether respondent currently has a mental abnormality as defined by MHL§10.03(i).

On 13 January 2010, the jury returned a verdict that respondent did not have a mental abnormality.

Published on: March 6, 2013

Petitioner Files For Judgment Pursuant to CPLR Article 78

by Stephen Bilkis

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.

Published on: March 2, 2013

Defendant Appeals Order of Disposition Regarding Alleged Probation Violation

by Stephen Bilkis

A Lawyer said that, in a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, defendant appealed the order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County, dated February 10, 2005, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated November 22, 2004, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the sex crime of sexual misconduct, placed him under the supervision of the “Probation Department of the County of Queens” for a period of 18 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated November 22, 2004.

A source said that, defendant in another separate case for the crime of rape also filed with the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, an application for writ of error coram nobis to set aside a judgment of the County Court, Queens County, sentencing defendant as a second offender on his conviction in New York of second degree assault. Defendant was found to be a second offender because of an alleged prior conviction in California of assault with intent to commit rape. The defendant had been charged in California with assault with intent to commit rape in violation of California statute and had pleaded not guilty. The California transcript indicated that court found defendant guilty as charged in the information. Thereafter defendant was sent to a California mental institution. It was the contention of the defendant that the California proceedings did not constitute a judgment of conviction under California laws and that therefore he did not have a prior felony conviction.

Published on: February 26, 2013

Defendant Files Appeal Requesting to Withdraw Plea in Criminal Case

by Stephen Bilkis

In this criminal case, the defendant appealed from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered July 24, 1995, convicting him of attempted rape in the first degree and rape in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered July 24, 1995, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted burglary in the second degree. A Lawyer said that, by decision and order of this court dated November 24, 1997, the matter was remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, to hear and report on the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea, and the appeal was held in abeyance in the interim. The Supreme Court has filed its report.

The issue in this case is whether defendant may withdraw his plea in the interest of justice.

Published on: February 24, 2013

Court Rules on Juvenile Delinquency Hearing Regarding Rape Charges

by Stephen Bilkis

This is a juvenile delinquency petition filed by the respondent who has committed acts which, if he were an adult, would have been categorized as attempted rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the first and third degrees, rape in the third degree, forcible touching and sexual misconduct.

This petition revealed that on January 2, 2010, the respondent, a minor, committed multiple sex offenses against the victim who was also a minor. The deposition given by the victim stated that at approximately 12:00 o’clock in the morning on January 2, 2010, the respondent put his fingers inside her vagina and moved them in and out. The victim told the respondent to stop but then he put his penis inside her vagina and kept it thereat for a few minutes. The victim said that she kept trying to tell the respondent to stop and that she tried to get up but couldn’t do since the respondent kept on pushing her down. The victim was just eleven year old.

Published on: February 17, 2013

Defendant Files Appeal Challenging Evidence Omitted at Trial

by Stephen Bilkis

This an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County rendered July 8, 1988, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence. A source said that, the defendant was charged and convicted of robbing the complainant at knife point on August 4, 1987, at approximately 11:30 P.M. Accordingly, to her trial testimony, the complainant had been beaten and raped by a different assailant prior to the robbery. The rape allegedly occurred in an apartment located on 89th Avenue and 162nd Street in Queens. After the rape, the complainant left the apartment and was walking to a nearby hospital when she allegedly met the defendant. She testified that she had previously met the defendant when he dated her sister in June 1987.

A Lawyer said that, she further testified that the defendant approached her and asked whether she had been raped. After she replied that she had, the defendant told her to wait in front of a nearby building while he obtained a gun in order to apprehend the rapist. Instead, the defendant returned after several minutes, allegedly pointed a knife at the complainant’s face, and demanded jewelry from her. She complied by handing over three rings. The defendant then took the rings and rode away on a bicycle. The complainant also testified that she ran to a hospital, four blocks away, immediately after the robbery. She was admitted to the hospital and discharged two weeks later, at which time she reported the subject robbery to the police.