New York Criminal Lawyer Blog 24/7

Published on: June 14, 2012

New York Appellate Court Finds Prosecution Failed to Prevent Prejudicial Evidence from Being Admitted in Sex Crime Case

by Stephen Bilkis

On September 4, 2009, J M was convicted of one count each of first degree rape, third degree rape, attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree and attempted criminal sexual act in the third degree. Mr. M appealed his conviction to the New York State Supreme Court Appellate, Second Division based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

According to trial records, Mr. M was charged with raping a 16-year-old girl who frequently baby sat for him and his girlfriend in their home. The girl claimed that Mr. M raped her one evening when she stayed overnight at the residence.

Published on: June 13, 2012

New York Appellate Court Decides if Age of Victim is Relevant

by Stephen Bilkis

On December 6, 2007, Pasqual R was convicted of one count each of second degree burglary and endangering the welfare of a child as well as four counts of third degree sexual abuse. At trial, the jury sent the judge a note questioning how the age of the victim impacted intent with regard to the burglary charge. The court essentially stated that it would advise the jury that the age of the victim was irrelevant. Mr. R’s criminal defense attorney objected and asked the court to reread its original instruction. Defense argued that age of the victim was a factor in determining intent to commit burglary. The court reaffirmed its stance and delivered a more specific instruction to the jury. The jury found Mr. R guilty of the above-mentioned charges and his defense attorney appealed to the Supreme Court Appellate Division, First Department.

The appellate court was asked to consider whether the court should have reread the original instruction as requested by defense counsel. Defense claimed that the revised instruction the trial judge provided was incorrect and prejudicially misleading. With regard to the defense’s argument, the court held that it was appropriate for the trial judge to have delivered more specific instructions to the jury, rather than the readback of the charge that was originally requested since the jury clearly did not understand the information given to them initially.

Published on: June 12, 2012

New York Court Discusses The Use of Admissions Against Interest in Sex Crime Case

by Stephen Bilkis

On October 16, 1997, a male identified only as C.B. made a videotaped confession to a Bronx Assistant District Attorney following his arrest. During the confession, C.B. discussed numerous criminal offenses and described on at least 11 different occasions on which he had entered private residences unlawfully and in some cases, masturbated onto a sleeping female victim. He also claims to be an exhibitionist and states that he needs help because he has a problem or illness that made him repeatedly commit the crimes.

C.B.’s criminal defense attorney subsequently filed a motion with the Bronx County Supreme Court to exclude statements made in the confession that related to the charges he was arrested on. The motion also included a request to exclude testimony from the victims and the minutes of the Grand Jury proceedings. Specifically, defense counsel argued that the victim should be precluded from testifying at trial since the statements offered would be irrelevant; that the videotaped confession should be excluded since it contains evidence of unrelated and uncharged crimes; that the videotape itself was prejudicial; and that C.B. was not competent to testify as to his own mental capacity.

Published on: June 11, 2012

New York Appellate Court Rejects Claim that Evidence of Prior Crimes Was Prejudicial to the Defendant

by Stephen Bilkis

In September 2000, Darrin H was accused of sexually abusing his 16-year-old daughter and having sex with one of her 15-year-old friends. Police arrested Mr. H and after reading him his Miranda rights, he signed a written statement attesting to the fact that he may have had sex with his daughter while drunk. He was subsequently charged with 120 separate crimes, including multiple first degree sodomy charges, first degree rape charges and endangering the welfare of a child.

At the conclusion of Mr. H trial, 88 of the 120 counts were submitted to the jury. He was convicted of two counts of third degree rape, incest, seven counts of endangering the welfare of a child and two counts of third degree sodomy. His criminal defense attorney filed a motion to set aside the verdict, which was denied. Mr. H was sentenced to an aggregate term of 5 1/3 to 16 years. He subsequently appealed his conviction to the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division.

Published on: June 10, 2012

New York Court Says Landlord May Not Evict Tenant for Being a Domestic Violence Victim

by Stephen Bilkis

A 30-year old female tenant was served a notice of termination by her landlord because she engaged in illegal and violent behavior during domestic disputes. The tenant is under a federal-government-assisted Section 8 tenancy. According to sources, the tenant stabbed her partner in one of numerous disturbances she created in and around the building. The tenant did not deny stabbing her partner but she said it was only in defense of herself because her partner engaged in domestic violence against her.

According to the federal Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005, an incident of domestic violence or criminal activity relating to domestic violence will not be construed to violate a public-housing or government-assisted lease and will not be good cause to terminate a public-housing or government-assisted tenancy, like a Section 8 tenancy, if the tenant is the victim or threatened victim of that domestic violence. VAWA’s goal is to prevent a landlord from penalizing a tenant for being a victim of domestic violence.

Published on: June 9, 2012

New York Supreme Court Upholds Drug Conviction

by Stephen Bilkis

On October 11, 2007 an undercover detective from the Broome County Sheriff’s Office in New York was advised by a confidential informant that a man who went by the street name of “Ace” was selling cocaine. He provided the detective with a cell phone number of the man. The detective called the cell phone and made arrangements to meet with “Ace” for the purpose of buying some cocaine.

After getting off of the phone, the officer looked up all of the known drug dealers in the area that used the street name, “Ace.” There were three persons who were using that name. The detective went to the location that was agreed upon and “Ace” approached the passenger side of his car. He leaned in and exchanged a small “knotted wrap” baggy of cocaine for $50 cash from the detective. They had a short conversation and the dealer left. The drugs tested positive for cocaine.

Published on: June 8, 2012

New York Courts Decide if New Drug Law Should be Applied Retroactively in Defendant’s Case

by Stephen Bilkis

A 33-year old man was indicted by a jury and charged with marijuana possession. Court records showed that the defendant was a second felony offender but not a violent offender. During the course of plea negotiations, the defendant was offered by the State a plea to a B felony in satisfaction of the indictment with a minimum sentence of four and a half years to nine years in state prison. Prior to defendant’s plea, the New York State Legislature passed the Drug Law Reform Act, which was signed into law in 2004.

The People took the plea with a minimum sentence but the sole issue in contention is, what is the minimum state prison sentence now allowed by law given the passage of the new law.

Published on: June 6, 2012

New York Court Decides Grandparent Visitation Rights in Light of Child Abuse Allegations

by Stephen Bilkis

In November of 1996, a father of a little girl was arrested and taken in to custody. The facts of this case once known exposed a level of domestic violence that was abhorrent. The man was arrested for assaulting the mother of his child. While they were married at the time of the abuse, the mother has since divorced him. He is serving ten years in Elmira Prison for the assaults on his family.

While they were married, the man repeatedly beat his wife causing her to at one time or another have her nose broken twice, her ankle broken, and two of her ribs broken. Her head had visible bald areas where he would pull her hair out. Additionally, he would keep her handcuffed in the floor of the bathroom all day. She was only released to take their child to the school bus, or to eat with her captor. She was once released to attend his father’s wake. When she arrived with two black eyes, missing hair and bruises on her face, her mother-in-law told her to put on a hat and sunglasses so that no one would ask any questions. She stated that on the day of the arrest, she was in the car with her husband and his mother, he had become angry with her and punched her in the face causing her blood to “splatter” the inside of the car. He was agitated and threatened to kill her and her father. When he stopped to get gas, she jumped from the car and ran screaming for help. The police arrived and he was arrested, convicted and sentenced to prison. His mother now claims a right to see the grandchild.

Published on: June 5, 2012

New York Appellate Court Discusses Corroboration Requirement in Sex Crimes Case

by Stephen Bilkis

Brian F was charged with and convicted of multiple counts of sodomy, sexual abuse and endangering the welfare of a child. His criminal defense attorney challenged his conviction with the New York Court of Appeals, on the grounds that the testimony of his victims was insufficient to prove his guilt in connection with the sex crimes.

Specifically, Mr. F argued that the testimony did not meet the corroboration requirement as set forth under New York law. Section 60.22 of the CPL and Section 130.16 of the Penal Law preclude a conviction for sex crimes based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice or victim.

Published on: June 3, 2012

New York Courts Discuss Robbery Charge Where Weapon Used Wasn’t Real

by Stephen Bilkis

Every day the cases of robbery can be deemed as numerous. In fact, every rep does not run out of such cases to handle for legal proceedings. According to the Penal Law, any individual can be considered guilty of robbery if he steals the property not his own with force. Also it involves the possible display of what seems to be a threatening tool like a pistol or any other kind of firearm. But did you know that even if you do not hold an actual gun and yet you somehow impose that you have one just to carry out your robbery plan can still convict you of the crime?

This is what was discovered with the case of Vincent K as researched by a New York grand larceny lawyer. Vincent admitted that he stole US money, jewelry, a wallet and subway tokens from Henry L last October 14, 1978. He stated in his testimony that to convince the victim to give him what he wants from him, he inserted his hand inside his pocket making it appear that he has a gun ready. But the truth of the matter is that he was actually unarmed. With the trial court ready to hear the plea, they are to decide whether the crime of robbery committed is in the second degree.