New York Criminal Lawyer Blog 24/7

Published on: August 30, 2012

New York Court Discusses Custody Where Child is Afraid of Father

by Stephen Bilkis

In August of 1973, an orthodox Jewish woman married an orthodox Jewish man in Brooklyn, New York. They were married for 32 years and had four children. The eldest daughter was age 32 and the youngest age 13 when the couple divorced. At the time of the marriage, the husband was 22 years of age and had just graduated from college. The wife was eighteen years of age and was a high school graduate.

Over the first few years of their marriage, the father completed dental school and set up a thriving dental practice. The wife encouraged him in his career and was active within his practice. She did most of the hiring for his practice. The wife purchased the family home and decorated it. She returned to school when he was working in his practice and ultimately obtained a bachelor’s degree in education, a master’s degree, and a post-graduate degree as well as a social work certificate. On June 10, 2005, the husband was granted a divorce.

Published on: August 29, 2012

Based on Changing Circumstances Court Modifies Current Orders for Spouse

by Stephen Bilkis

On January 24, 1992 a man and a woman from Ecuador were married in Brooklyn, New York. The husband was seven years younger than his wife. She had one daughter from her previous marriage to this man’s cousin. The cousin died a few years before. The couple had two children of their own. The husband is a business and property owner, the wife was a stay at home mom. She had immigrated to the United States illegally. She would occasionally get jobs doing piece sewing in factories before most of the factories shut down. In May of 2001, the couple separated.

Family Court issued a temporary order of protection demanding that the husband not go near the wife, children, or marital home. The wife cited numerous occasions of domestic violence that have left her with memory problems and limited cognition. She reports that the daily beatings where she was yanked into walls by her hair caused permanent brain damage.

Published on: August 28, 2012

In 1992, a young man who had been born in Albania returned for a visit

by Stephen Bilkis

In 1992, a young man who had been born in Albania returned for a visit. While he was there, he met a young Albanian girl and they began to date. He returned to the United States to work and the following year went back to Albania for an additional visit. During this visit, he asked the girl to marry him and she accepted. They were married in September of 1995. After the marriage, he moved his new wife into his parents’ home and returned to the US. The following year, she gave birth to their first child, a son. The husband did not see his new son until the boy was two months old. In 2001, the husband moved his family to the US and over the next years had four more children. The youngest was born in March of 2006.

During this time, the young mother was hiding a horrible truth. She was the victim of domestic violence. It began in November of 1999 while her husband was in Albania for a visit. He became angry because his young son needed to go to the bathroom which was located in an outhouse. When the mother tried to take the boy to the bathroom, the husband became enraged. He said that the boy was lying and did not need to use the bathroom. He then grabbed the mother by her head and smashed it into a wall. She had a black eye, hearing problems, and bruises to her ear. The recovery from these injuries was several weeks. This attack occurred in front of the couple’s oldest son.

Published on: August 22, 2012

Court Decides Defendant Not a Good Candidate for Judicial Diversion Program

by Stephen Bilkis

On May 24, 2011, a Kings County, New York man was arrested during the execution of a search warrant. The search warrant was the result of an undercover investigation that covered more than four months. On 13 separate occasions, undercover police officer’s observed the man in possession of heroin and in possession of cocaine. They also observed him sell heroin and cocaine on these occasions.

The case was referred to the Brooklyn Treatment Court on August 16, 2011. The man had requested to be considered for Judicial Diversion of his case. Judicial Diversion is a program that was designed for certain felony offenders spelled out in Criminal Procedure Law Article 216. It grants the judges authority to decide which nonviolent offenders have committed their offenses as a result of substance abuse or dependence. They are then given the opportunity to avoid a jail sentence by contracting with the state to complete a court monitored treatment program.

Published on: August 19, 2012

Defendant Appeals Drug Conviction, Arguing Violation of 8th and 14th Amendments

by Stephen Bilkis

On November 7, 1974, the Supreme Court of Monroe County, New York was called upon to hear the appeal of a drug possession conviction. A New York man was convicted after a jury trial of “Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the First Degree based on a $5000.00 sale of cocaine, Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth Degree, and Criminally Using Drug Paraphernalia in the Second Degree.” The appeal of the offender’s cocaine possession and sale case was based on the contention by the offender that the state’s statute was written in violation of the United States Constitution.

The offender claims that the punishment imposed on Class A drug felons is cruel and unusual in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The defendant argued that the sentences for drug offenses in New York are disproportionate to the offenses themselves. He sites in his behalf that other jurisdictions have lowered their mandated sentences when they were determined to be disproportionate. He contends that New York’s failure to do so makes them in violation of the United States Constitution.

Published on: August 17, 2012

Defendant Argues that Integrated Domestic Violence Court Didn’t Have Proper Jurisdiction Over His Case

by Stephen Bilkis

New York has created a system designed to streamline the problems that arise in prosecuting domestic violence cases in the court system. Historically, cases of domestic violence are often heard in several courts at the same time because of the very nature of the offenses. This is especially true if the domestic violence issue escalated through its continuation. A domestic violence case could conceivably begin as a subject violates traffic laws to either harass the other party or to get away from the other party. Since traffic infractions are considered to be minor legal torts below that of a misdemeanor. It would be historically sent to traffic court.

If after committing the traffic violation, the suspect then commits a misdemeanor crime, that crime would be heard in the state court of misdemeanor crimes. Felonies would be heard in the superior court of the state. Because, domestic violence cases often have elements in each of these courts, New York decided to pass the one case one judge policy. In this system, called the Integrated Domestic Violence system, one judge is assigned to one family. All of the cases that involve that family, from the most minor traffic to the highest felony are then heard by one judge appointed to their problem. In order for the judge to be able to hear all of the cases, the judge has to be a Supreme Court Justice.

Published on: August 16, 2012

On September 7, 2004, an appeal was placed before the Second Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals

by Stephen Bilkis

On September 7, 2004, an appeal was placed before the Second Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals. It was an appeal on behalf of all mothers who had suffered domestic violence and who were separated from their children because their kids had witnessed the violence. What brought this about?

On April 2000, a mother sued the New York City Administration for Children’s Services (ACS). Not soon after, three other mothers also filed their complaints. When the charges were investigated, it was discovered that ACS had a policy of taking children away from their mothers and homes if the mothers were victims of domestic violence. It was alleged that the mothers were “engaged in the abuse” because they were victims of it. The mothers protested that this was against their rights and that it violated the constitution.

Published on: August 14, 2012

New York City Children’s Services Files Case to Remove Children from the Home

by Stephen Bilkis

On June 3, 2010, the New York City Children’s Services (NYCCS) filed a case against a mother and father for not providing the minimum degree of care to their children as required by law. This was because the father regularly abused the mother in front of the children and the children were unable to go to school regularly.

The Family Court ordered that the three children be moved to their grandmother’s home and that the father would temporarily not be allowed to go near them or the grandmother, except on scheduled visits with the presence of the grandmother or NYCCS. Not long after, the grandmother and the three children moved to Pennsylvannia to stay with relatives.

Published on: August 12, 2012

Defendant Requests Dismissal of Case Based on Constitutional Grounds

by Stephen Bilkis

A 37-year old man has been indicted for the drug crimes sale of a controlled substance and heroin possession. Under the revised criminal laws relating to drug crimes, each of the crime charged is classified as an A–III felony, punishable by an indeterminate term of imprisonment, the minimum period of which, for a first offender, is from one to eight and one-third years, and the maximum of which is life imprisonment.

The accused demanded for the dismissal of his indictment based on constitutional grounds. The accused specifically assailed the validity of certain criminal laws on the ground that these provisions do violence to his due process and equal protection rights and that they are inconsistent with the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment under the Federal and New York Constitutions.

Published on: August 11, 2012

Defendant Files Appeal with NY Appellate Court Based on Alleged Hearsay Violations

by Stephen Bilkis

On the night of October 3, 2004, a New York woman was approached by her roommate. He told her that he had gone in to her purse and taken five dollars, but that he had later returned it. She became upset. They had been lovers in the past and when he was desperate for a place to stay, she had allowed him to live in her spare bedroom, platonically. She did not; however, want him to start feeling so “at home” that he did not think anything about going through her personal items like her purse and taking whatever he wants from her. She knew the problems that she could have with him in that regard. After all, they have known each other for a long time. She told him that he had crossed over the line and needed to move out.

He became furious. He physically assaulted her, strangling her first with a scarf and then a black leather belt. He told her that he was going to kill her. She managed to get away and called the police emergency number. He ran away. As soon as he was gone the woman packed up his property and took them over to his brother’s house. When she returned, the police were at her apartment. When they entered, they found the male subject hiding in a corner of her apartment waiting for her to return. He was arrested and she was taken to the hospital for treatment for her injuries.