New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

The tax man comes for everyone. Seems like the Queens District Attorney does so as well. While the New York taxing authorities take their payment in money, District Attorney's Offices seek not just your money, but your freedom as well. Unfortunately for Diana Rabin, an accountant, her mother Lyidmila Levy, sister Alisa Derabin and clients Merced R. Baumer and Nyemah Johnson, they are now facing up to fifteen years in state prison for allegedly attempting to obtain a combined $1.1 million in New York State tax refunds.

Not only are the defendants alleged to have claimed hundreds of thousands of dollars in income, but tens of thousands of dollars in taxes withheld from this purported income. According to the District Attorney's Office, this income was made up as some of the defendants did not even work.

According to the Queens District Attorney website:

"Rabin attempted to collect more than $1.1 million in state tax refunds between March 2008 and June 2010 for herself and the four other defendants whose returns she had prepared and who, in fact, did unlawfully receive and retain a total of approximately $275,581 before the state Tax Department discovered the fraud and put a halt to other refunds.

In carrying out the alleged scheme, Rabin is accused of fraudulently preparing and filing tax returns for herself and the other defendants that claimed each had earned exorbitant amounts of fictitious income from employees. For example, it is alleged that Rabin and her mother listed employers on their returns who had previously fired them, Baumer and Johnson listed employers for whom they had never worked (but had previously employed and fired Rabin), and that Derabin exaggerated the per diem wages that she earned as a nurse from a home care agency. It is further alleged that during state Tax Department audits of the defendants' tax returns all but Baumer filed forged memoranda that purported to have been issued by their "employers" and repeated the false statements about the wages they had earned and the taxes withheld.

In total, it is alleged that the five defendants claimed a total of $2,639,088 in fictitious wages for the tax years 2007, 2008 and 2009 and tax refunds totaling $1,103,846 when, in fact, they were only entitled to a total of $13,123 in tax refunds if all the other information on their returns were correct."

The defendants are charged, not indicted, on the following crimes:

Attempted Grand Larceny in the First Degree (a "C" felony), Grand Larceny in the Second and Third Degrees (a "C" and "D" felony respectively), Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Second and Third Degrees (a "C" and "D" felony respectively), Forgery and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degrees (both "D" felonies), Falsifying Business Records and Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the First Degrees (both "E" felonies) and other crimes relating to Conspiracy and New York Criminal Tax Fraud. For first time offenders, a "C" felony is punishable by up to fife to fifteen years in state prison, a "D" felony is punishable by up to two and one third to seven years in state prison and an "E" felony is punishable by up to one and one third to four years in state prison.

For further information, including definitions, case law and other materials, please follow the highlighted link for each crime or review the applicable sections of Crotty Saland's New York Criminal Law Blog at NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm representing clients throughout the New York City region. Prior to starting the firm, the founding members served as prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office under Robert Morgenthau.

Not to be mistaken with Rewarding Official Misconduct (New York Penal Law 200.20), Official Misconduct (New York Penal Law 195.00), is a unique crime prosecuted in New York associated with public servants (defined below). Official Misconduct occurs as follows:

When a public servant has the intent to obtain a benefit or deprive another person of a benefit, he:

1. Commits a particular act related to his office that is an unauthorized exercise of his official functions; or

2. Knowingly refrains from performing a duty which is imposed upon him by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of his office.

An "A" misdemeanor, Official Misconduct is punishable by up to one year in a county or city jail such as Rikers.

Defined under New York Penal Law 10.00(15), a "public servant" includes any public officer or employee of the state of New York.

It is very important to note that for a person to be guilty of this offense under subsection (1), that person must fulfill two prongs. That is, the act must be related to his office AND the act must be an official function. Although directly addressing the charge of Bribe Receiving and subsequently the offense of Official Misconduct, the Court of Appeals (New York's highest court) upheld the Appellate Division's decision that a corrections officer could not be guilty of either charge where he received payments for fixing traffic tickets. In that matter the Appellate Division found that the, "[t]he action taken by defendant, corrupt or not, was completely unrelated to his position, and not such as would be within the scope of his real or apparent authority." Clearly, fixing traffic tickets has no relation to the office of or the official functions of a corrections officer. See People v. Rossi 50 N.Y.2d 813 (1980). If this same offense was perpetrated by a traffic cop, the outcome would likely have been very different.

Like any other criminal offense, the legal language of the statutes and associated legal decisions must be reviewed and analyzed to see whether the accused's actions falls with in the parameters and prescribed conduct of the crime.

For further information on the crimes of Rewarding Official Misconduct and Bribe Receiving, please follow the respective links or review the New York Criminal Law Blog at NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors.

New York County District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. is following his predecesor's commitment to not only cleaning up crime in the streets, but fraud in the suites as well. This mantra does not stop with white collar crime and DA Vance appears to be ready to build upon the principles and objectives of the Immigrant Affairs Program established under Robert Morgenthau. In fact, DA Vance announced yesterday an indictment of Teresa Nora Martinez for allegations of immigration fraud. If this case and others are any indication, DA Vance is fed up and displeased (dare I say incensed ?) with alleged swindlers and scammers in the arena of immigration fraud. According to the DA, Ms. Martinez stole $12,000 from immigrants after informing them she was an attorney or was associated with attorneys who could assist them with their immigration issues.

The District Attorney press release states as follows:

"The crimes charged in the indictment occurred between November 2008 and April 2009. According to statements in the court record, Martinez defrauded two Mexican immigrants by introducing herself as a licensed immigration attorney and promised to assist them with their immigration cases and to get them green cards. She told a third victim, also a Mexican immigrant, that she was working with attorneys and guaranteed that he would get a green card if he paid the demanded fees. In exchange for her services, Martinez demanded multiple payments of cash or money order from the three victims, which totaled $12,000.

As described in court, victims became suspicious when Martinez began avoiding their calls and at one point falsely told them that their immigration cases had been scheduled for court hearings on a Saturday, a day when the court is closed. They soon discovered that she was not a licensed attorney and demanded the return of their money. Martinezrefused and they reported her scheme to the District Attorney's Office. "

A Grand Jury has indicted Ms. Martinez on two counts of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, one count of Scheme to Defraud, one count of Practicing a Profession without a License (as an attorney) and one count of Petit Larceny. Grand Larceny in the Third Degree is a "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in state prison while the other offenses are lesser felonies and a misdemeanor.

It is interesting to note that the prosecution charged what appears to be three separate thefts (two Third Degree Grand Larcenies and one Petit Larceny) as opposed to aggregating the values. As a general rule, aggregation is only permitted when the victims are the same. However, some case law does exists permitting aggregation of multiple victims in the same scheme. Here, where the threshold to hit the greater offense of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree is property valued in excess of $50,000, it appears that it made little sense to push the law and aggregate values from different victims as part of the same scheme. Obviously, $12,000 is far below the necessary minimum for a "C" felony. In the event other alleged victims are found and the value of the thefts potentially increases, maybe the prosecution will view the case differently. Regardless, Ms. Martinez as a long road ahead.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors who served under Robert Morgenthau in both the Trial and Investigations Divisions.

Although it took months of wrangling, the New York criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland PC are pleased that our client was able to avoid a criminal record after being arrested and charged with felony Forgery (New York Penal Law 170.10) and felony Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument (New York Penal Law 170.25). Prosecutors had alleged that our client, an employee of doctor at a New York City Hospital, stole sheets of a prescription pad belonging to that physician and drafted a prescription for Oxycodone. This prescription was allegedly presented to a pharmacy where it was determined by staff that the doctor's signature did not match prior prescriptions. Additionally, staff at the pharmacy questioned the number of Oxycodone pills requested.

After advising the prosecution of the facts of the case, providing a "package" about the client and supplying other factors to law enforcement, the prosecution ultimately agreed to dismiss the felony counts and permit our client to plead guilty to Disorderly Conduct (a violation and not a crime). Currently a nursing student, our client will now be able to proceed with her career and without the scarlet letter of a criminal conviction.

For further information on New York Forgery, New York Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and New York Criminal Diversion of Prescription Medication, please follow the highlighted link. For further information on these and other areas of criminal law, legal decisions and newsworthy cases, please follow the link to the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog or go to the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm. Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland PC have experience handling criminal investigations, arrests and trials from both sides of the law.

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. is trying to be more proactive when it comes to crimes involving knives. Last year, In Manhattan alone, there were 2,269 arrests involving the possession of illegal knives. Mere possession of certain weapons such as "gravity knives" and "switchblades" is punishable as an "A" misdemeanor pursuant to New York Penal Law 265.01 - Criminal Possession of a Weapon on the Fourth Degree.

According to the District Attorney's website, DA Vance, Jr. has reached an agreement with national and local retailers of knives that are illegal in New York. Retailers, such as Home Depot, Eastern Mountain Sports, Paragon Sports, and four others, will enter into deferred prosecution agreements. The law permits these companies, like individuals, to be prosecuted for crimes - a fact recently addressed by DA Vance in an earlier press release. In return, these companies will provide the Manhattan District Attorney's Office the past four year's profit. In total, that amount is approximately $1.9 million. Additionally, the companies will finance an education campaign regarding illegal knives. Lastly, Frederico Gebauer, a managing director at Kroll, Inc. and former Manhattan prosecutor, will serve free of charge as the District Attorney's "Knife Sales Monitor" to review and keep track of knife sales. Hopefully, the Manhattan District Attorney's Office recognizes that many upstanding people who possessed knives for legitimate purposes, such as for work, purchased these knives from these and other stores assuming (with good reason) that there was nothing illegal about it.

According to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office press release, "the $1.9 million will be distributed to the City and State: 10 percent will be given to the State ($190K); 51 percent will be given to the City ($969,000); and the remainder ($741,000) set aside for our law enforcement partners." It is interesting to note that District Attorney Vance, Jr.'s approach to redistributing the wealth and detailing how the monies will be shared differs from the past when New York City complained of not getting a larger piece of the forfeiture pie.

This program and investigation by District Attorney Vance, Jr. is not over despite its apparent success to date. In fact, the District Attorney's Office website is clear:

"The District Attorney's Office has begun Phase II of the investigation, targeting out-of-state vendors selling to New York residents - which is a serious crime. Those companies are opening themselves to prosecution to the fullest extent of the law."

For further information on Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Fourth Degree and knife crimes, please follow the highlighted link.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm. Prior to founding the practice, the New York criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland PC served as prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.

The New York criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Crotty Saland PC routinely get telephone calls from or represent individuals charged with Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Fourth Degree in violation of New York Penal Law 265.01. Often times the story starts off the same. Not knowing it was crime to possess certain knives, a person is stopped after the police observe the clip of a knife outside their pocket. Ultimately, a knife is recovered and the police claim that the knife is a "gravity knife." Whether their arrest is in Manhattan, Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens or anywhere in New York, the crime is the same. That is, Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Fourth Degree is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail. It makes no difference if the person is issued a NY Desk Appearance Ticket, put through the arrest process or it is their first brush with the law.

As I have noted in the past, New York Penal Law 265.01(1) is a per se offense, meaning, the possession of certain weapons is an automatic crime. Possession of a "gravity knife" is one of the specified weapons regardless if your intended use was for work or protection. Having said that, one imperative step, which is fairly obvious, is to ascertain if in fact the alleged "gravity knife" is in fact a "gravity knife." As both a prosecutor and a New York criminal defense lawyer I have seen police make a mistake as to the nature if the knife. In those cases where the weapon is wrongly alleged to be a "gravity knife" and there is no intent to use the knife in a criminal way, the case may be one which should be dismissed.

Although it seems fairly easy, a dispute may arise as to the nature of the knife and wether or not it qualifies as a "gravity knife." Simply put, a "gravity knife," defined under New York Penal Law 265.00(5) is a "knife which has a blade which is released from the handle or sheath thereof by the force of gravity or the application of centrifugal force which, when released, is locked in place by means of a button, spring, lever or other device." Again, seems fairly straight forward, right?

Well, what if that alleged "gravity knife" is a "butterfly knife?" What if the knife is one that opens with the force of gravity into place, but, unlike a true "gravity knife" it does not lock into place? Is there a violation of New York Penal Law 265.01(1)? If not a violation of New York Penal Law 265.01, is there a violation of any law?

The easy answer to this question is that the "butterfly knife" as described above is not a "gravity knife" and therefore, your mere possession of it is not a violation of New York Penal Law 265.01(1). See People v. Zuniga, 303 A.D.2d 773 (2nd Dept. 2003). However, do not think that because it is not a per se weapon possessing a "butterfly knife" may never be criminal. In fact, the possession of any knife with a blade size equal to or exceeding four inches is a violation of the New York City Administrative Code (10-133). Although only a violation, if you possess this knife, or any object for that matter, with the intent to use it unlawfully against another, you will face the "A" misdemeanor of Criminal Possession in the Fourth Degree pursuant to subsection two of New York Penal Law 265.01.

Lastly, and again equally important to know, New York law only requires that you knew you possessed a knife and not that you knew you possessed a particular type of knife. In other words, if you knowingly had a knife on your person, but you had no idea it was a "gravity knife," your lack of knowledge as to the type of knife will not be a defense to its possession.

The above concepts are relatively straight forward in the New York Penal Law. However, the legal decisions, case law and statutes continually grow. For further information on weapon offenses such as Criminal Possession in the Fourth Degree, please review the New York Weapon Possession & Crime section of the Crotty Saland Website or the New York Weapon Possession section of the New York criminal lawyer blog.

Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal defense lawyers at Crotty Saland PC represent clients in all criminal matters throughout the New York City region.

While it may be the functional equivalent to a theft of nickles and dimes to the average New Yorker, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. has announced the indictment of John Haggerty for defrauding New York's billionaire mayor out of over $1 million. Charged with Grand Larceny in the First Degree, Money Laundering in the Second Degree and Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree, Mr. Haggerty faces up to 25, 15 and 4 years respectively on each offense.

According to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, Mayor Bloomberg was duped out a cool million after Mr. Haggerty received the monies to operate an Election Day security and polling organization to be run by the New York State Independence Party. It is alleged that Special Election Operations LLC was to run the security. Instead, prosecutors claim that Mr. Haggerty's Special Election Operations LLC was a scam. In lieu of using this money to secure the polls, Haggerty is alleged to have spent merely $32,000 for this purpose while using approximately $600,000 to purchase his own home. Compounding matters, prosecutors claim that Mr. Haggerty did not come clean when questions arose as to where the money went. It is further alleged that Mr. Haggerty produced fraudulent paychecks to corroborate that staffers were paid the missing money to watch the polls on Election Day.

Certainly, time will tell what the outcome of this case will be. Unfortunately for Mr. Haggerty, however, District Attorney Vance, Jr. is still finding his prosecutorial niche after the decades long leadership of Robert Morgenthau. If recent cases are any indication, the niche that District Attorney Vance, Jr. is seeking to carve out as his own is the prosecution of public employee and governmental corruption. Regardless of the outcome, this case will be another black to the face of New City politics.

For further information on the crimes of New York Grand Larceny and New York Falsifying Business Records, please follow the respective links.

A New York criminal defense firm, Crotty Saland PC was founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors.

One of the most common crimes prosecuted by Assistant District Attorneys in New York (Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx and beyond) is the offense of Assault in the Third Degree pursuant to New York Penal Law 120.00. When one is accused of Assault in the Third Degree, the prosecution must set forth certain elements. One critical element is that the complainant or victim must have suffered physical injury. Generally, "physical injury," as defined under section 10.00(9) of the New York Penal Law, is an "impairment of physical condition or substantial pain." Having presented this definition, is a complaint sufficient accusing you of Assault in the Third Degree if it merely states that the complainant suffered "substantial pain" as a result of your actions, but without "fleshing out" the "substantial pain?" Is more needed for the prosecution's case to survive a motion to dismiss from your New York criminal defense attorney?

According to a Manhattan Criminal Court Judge, merely asserting that a complainant suffered "substantial pain" without more is not sufficient. In People v. A. S., decided May 11, 2010, the complaint against the accused alleged as follows:

"Deponent [a police officer] is informed by a person known to the District Attorney's Office [the complainant] that said defendant approached said informant and shoved and hit said informant about the body with his fist, causing substantial pain."

In analyzing whether or not to dismiss the complaint, the Court noted that "'petty slaps, shoves, kicks and the like delivered out of hostility, meanness and similar motives' are not acts that constitute assault. (See Philip A., 49 N.Y.2d at 200 (quoting Temporary Commission on Revision of the Penal Law and Criminal Code, Proposed Penal Law, p. 330); People v. Chiddick, 8 N.Y.3d 445, 448 [2007].)"

Upon reviewing the complaint and applicable case law, the Court stated:

"In the instant matter, the court must consider whether the allegations and all reasonable inferences therefrom are sufficient to establish that the complaining witness experienced substantial pain and therefore suffered physical injury. 'Substantial pain' is 'more than slight or trivial pain' but 'need not...be severe or intense.' (Chiddick, 8 N.Y.3d at 447.) The Court in Chiddick identified 'several factual aspects...that can be examined to decide whether enough pain was shown to support a finding of substantiality[,]' including: (1) the injury that the defendant inflicted, viewed objectively, (2) the complaining witness's subjective description of what he or she felt, (3) whether the complaining witness sought medical attention, and (4) the motive of the offender. (Id. at 447-48.)

Here, the only allegation as to the alleged assault is that the defendant shoved and hit the complainant about the body with his fist. The accusatory instrument alleges that this caused the complaining witness substantial pain. The court concludes that the utter absence of any description of the injuries allegedly experienced by the informant/complainant renders this accusatory instrument defective, the element of physical injury not being sufficiently alleged."

The above decision by the court to dismiss the complaint against the defendant in this matter was based in both law and facts as set forth in that particular complaint. Whether this decision as well as the Chiddick case are applicable in your criminal matter is something that cannot be addressed through a blog entry, but an issue that you should consider discussing with your own legal counsel.

For more information on the crime of Assault in New York, please follow the highlighted link. Additional information can be found at the New York Criminal Law Blog at NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm. Founded by former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal defense lawyers at Crotty Saland PC represent the accused throughout the New York Cit region.

If you possess a fake, fraudulent or forged credit card, you may be charged with a "D" felony in New York in violation of New York Penal Law 170.25, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree. It makes no difference whether the credit card is completely fake, has altered names on it, incorrect information on the magnetic strip or is fraudulent in many other ways. In fact, depending on how the credit card is manipulated, you may also face numerous other felonies including, but not limited to, Identity Theft in the First Degree and Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Fourth Degree. These crimes are "D" and "E" felonies punishable by up to seven and four years in state prison respectively.

A common defense to the charge of possessing a forged credit card asserted by the accused is that they were not using the alleged fake credit card. Even if they were using the forged credit card, the accused may argue that they were unaware that the credit card was in fact a forged instrument (fake). While this may be a viable defense, prosecutors won't merely roll over. Certainly, it is the prosecution's burden to prove your knowledge and intent (Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument requires your intent to defraud or deceive another), but is there anything in their legal arsenal that may assist them in proving that you knew that the credit or debit card was in fact forged despite your claim?

The answer to the above question is found in New York Penal Law section 170.27. Pursuant to section 170.27, if you possess more than one credit or debit card that is forged, the law permits the prosecutor to instruct the Grand Jury or a judge to instruct a trial jury that it is presumed that you possessed those credit or debit cards with the knowledge that they were forged and with the intent to defraud, deceive or injure another person. In other words, if you only possess one fraudulent credit card the prosecution cannot ask for this presumption, but if you possess more than one credit card a jury will be instructed that they may follow this legal guideline.

It is important to note that the presumption is not mandatory, meaning, a jury may decline to follow it. Regardless, having this instruction read to a jury can be extremely damming to your criminal defense. Whether or not this particular statute is read to the jury may have an impact on your case, but it should not have an impact on your New York criminal defense attorney's advocacy as it relates to your arrest and recovery of the alleged forged instruments as well any other applicable defense you might.

For information on the crimes of Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, Identity Theft and Forgery in New York, please click on the respective links. Additional information, including legal decisions and related criminal statutes, can be found on the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog web page as well as the Crotty Saland PC website.

Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm representing individuals throughout the New York City region.

Grabbing yet another headline, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced the indictment of four individuals and numerous companies for their involvement in an alleged Medicaid Fraud Scheme to the tune of $5.7 million. According to Attorney General Cuomo, three men, David Ibragimov, his son Arthur Ibragimov and his son-in-law Mikhail Isakov, operated three dental clinics in New York City (Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens). Although they owned these establishments, the men were not dentists and, if true, were not permitted to own those dental clinics.

It is alleged that these men had arrangements with dentists that they hired. This deal was that the dentists must pay the men's companies - AN International LLC, MA Concord LLC and MB Globus LLC - two thirds of the revenues received through Medicaid. Compounding matters, it is alleged that "flyer boys," the term us for recruiters, brought Medicaid patients to the clinic for treatment that was unecessary. In return, it is alleged that the "flyer boys" were compensated as well as the patient. It is alleged that not only did these patients receive cash and unecessary procedures, but sometimes they were paid with electronics such as CD players as well as coupons for McDonalds. It is alleged by the Attorney General that the defendants were so zealous that they pushed the dentists in their clinics to force "Medicaid recipients to agree to being fitted for dentures the same day their teeth were extracted and before their gums could heal."

The Attorney General also announced that Bruce Speiser, a dentist at one of the clinics, has been indicted in the "cash cow" scheme. Of the alleged $5.7 million, the Attorney General claims Medicaid paid Dr. Speiser $1.9 million. Although Dr. Speiser is the only dentist currently under indictment, the Attorney Generals Office is investigating other dentists employed by the Ibragimovs and Isakov.

According to the press release:

"David Ibragimov, AN International LLC, MA Concord LLC, MB Globus LLC and Bruce Speiser are charged with one count of Grand Larceny in the First Degree (a class "B" felony), and one count of Insurance Fraud in the First Degree (a class "B" felony), both of which carry a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. Arthur Ibragimov and Mikhail Isakov are charged with one count of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree (a class "D" felony) and one count of Insurance Fraud in the Third Degree(a class "D" felony), both of which carry a maximum sentence of 7 years in prison. Bruce Speiser, David Ibragimov, Arthur Ibragimov, Mikhail Isakov, MB Globus LLC and MA Concord LLC are also charged with one count of Medical Assistance Provider Prohibited Practice (Kickbacks) under the Social Services Law (class "E" felony), which carries a maximum penalty of 4 years in prison."

For further information on the crime of New York Grand Larceny, please follow the highlighted link.

For further information on the crime of New York Insurance Fraud, please follow the highlighted link.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors. Crotty Saland PC represents individuals in criminal investigations and arrests throughout the New York City region.

The New York criminal defense lawyers and former Manhattan prosecutors at Crotty Saland PC are pleased to announce another victory for a client charged with Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree for possessing a "loaded" firearm at John F. Kennedy (JFK) Airport in Queens. Although our client, a Florida teacher, was charged with New York Penal Law 265.03 and faced a mandatory minimum term of 3.5 years in prison if convicted of that felony, Crotty Saland PC secured a disposition where he pleaded to Disorderly Conduct pursuant to New York Penal Law 240.20. Not only did his plea to this violation avoid incarceration, probation or community service, the plea did not give our client a criminal record at all.

Unfortunately, many honest people who lack any criminal intent are swept into the New York criminal justice system for possessing firearms (pistols, hand guns, revolvers, etc.) without a proper permit to do so. Unwittingly, these people visit New York with the firearm thinking that it is "OK" to possess it in New York City because the have a license or permit to have that firearm in their home state. Often times, when they return home through a New York area airport such as LaGuardia and JFK in Queens, they check the firearm and end up getting arrested. Compounding matters, the firearm is legally loaded, albeit not physically, because the ammunition or bullets are in the hard case along with the gun. The message here is clear. Do not bring your firearm to New York unless you have the proper license(s) in New York State and New York City to do so.

It should go without saying that no two cases are the same and the results in one criminal matter do not guarantee similar results in a case that appears the same. Having said that, you should consult with a New York criminal defense attorney and keep yourself educated on the laws involving guns, pistols, revolvers and other firearms so that you can avoid the embarrassment and devastating impacts of an arrest.

For further information on Criminal Possession of a Weapon including New York gun and firearm crimes as well as information regarding gun arrests at New York airports, please follow the highlighted link. For information regarding legal decisions and various weapon statutes in New York, please review the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog section on weapon offense.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm representing clients in all criminal investigations and arrests. Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland PC represents clients throughout the greater NYC area.