New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

It is almost as if he is shooting fish in a barrel. Manhattan District Attorney, Cyrus Vance, Jr., has made another big splash announcing the arrest and indictment of a New York State Department of Motor Vehicle's ("DMV") clerk who is alleged to have unlawfully processed at least three drivers license applications. It is claimed by prosecutors, who are understandably concerned about this type of conduct, that one of the individuals who fraudulently obtained a license had previously been convicted of a felony and deported from the United States. Clarence Jenkins, the DMV clerk indicted for the alleged scheme, is charged with three counts each of Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree, a class D felony, Issuing a False Certificate, a class E felony, and Official Misconduct, a class A misdemeanor. If convicted, the accused faces up to seven, four and one year in custody on each respective offense.

In acknowledging the danger of illegally issuing New York State drivers licenses to those who are not entitled to them, DA Vance stated "... [Jenkins] may have jeopardized public safety." Whether as a New York criminal lawyer I agree with the prosecution's ultimate determination as to how to handle the case and seek a potential plea or sentence, DA Vance is certainly correct in his assertion. Unlike a minor attempting to get a license for the purpose of going to a bar or purchasing alcohol, fraud such as that alleged here has the potential for grave danger. Fortunately, it does not appear from the press release that this is the case.

In working with New York State Inspector General Ellen N. Biben, a former Manhattan prosecutor herself, the New York County District Attorney's Office alleges that Jenkins turned a tidy profit for his criminal conduct. In fact, Jenkins is accused of accepting forged driver licenses purportedly issued by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico from at least three individuals who paid money to obtain the illegally-issued New York State driver licenses. The amount of money he is believed to received totaled almost $15,000. It is claimed that Jenkins became immersed in this criminal scheme as early as 2009 when he instructed one of the individual to go to the DMV at 125th Street, wear a Yankees hat, sit in front of his window, and then wait for a signal.

As noted above, Jenkins faces a term of state prison should he be convicted of these crimes. Briefly, one is guilty of Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 170.25) when he possesses a written instrument with the intent to defraud that is fake or false and that object purports to be issued from a governmental agency such as the DMV. One is guilty of Issuing a False Certificate (New York Penal Law 175.40) when, being a public servant authorized by law to make or issue official certificates or other official written instruments, and with intent to defraud, one issues such an instrument (such as a drivers license) or makes the same with intent that it be issued, knowing that it contains a false statement or false information. Lastly, one is guilty of Official Misconduct (New York Penal Law 195.00(1)) when one is a public servant and with the intent to obtain a benefit one commits an act relating to one's office but constituting an unauthorized exercise of one's official functions, knowing that such act is unauthorized.

As I routinely note in cases such as these, it will be interesting to see how prosecutors proceed with the case. Because Jenkins is already indicted, he is starting off in a more precarious position than if he was merely arrested. Additionally, do prosecutors believe or does evidence establish that Jenkins had created or permitted the issuance of many more drivers licenses? Did Jenkins make admissions or is there independent evidence of these cash transactions? What evidence (computer records, for example) implicate Jenkins in the creation of each drivers license? These factors will certainly play out in where this indictment heads and how long it takes to achieve a disposition.

To further understand the fraud crimes listed above, either follow the links or review the websites and blogs below.

Established in 2008 by two former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland PC represent defendants who are the target of or have been arrested in any white collar and fraud case throughout the New York City and suburban area.

Stealing more than mere shekels, multiple alleged Identity Theft and check fraud rings pilfered $2 million from high worth individuals including the accounts of UJA-Federation donors. Although Hank Greenberg may not have noticed a few thousand dollars here or there, the alleged fraudsters are getting more than an "Oy Vey" from Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. for their alleged identity thieving. In fact, some of the nearly sixty defendants arrested or accused of various crimes are facing charges including Grand Larceny in the First Degree, a "B" felony punishable by a mandatory minimum of one to three years in prison. The maximum for this crime is eight and one third to twenty five years, but these numbers are all skewed should any of these men or women have prior felony records from the past ten years. While alleged gang association does not necessarily mean a criminal past, prosecutors further claim the many of those arrested in New York were members of the Bloods and Crips.

According to the New York County press release as well as numerous media outlets, the scheme (like many involving Identity Theft) was fairly east to perpetrate. For Example, Tracy Nelson, an employee of the UJA Federation, processed donor checks. This access to sensitive and financial information gave her the opportunity to allegedly take pictures and copy account information of donor checks. It is further claimed by DANY prosecutors that Nelson then sold the copies to other thieves who would open fraudulent checking accounts or credit cards with this information.

Although UJA Federation may be the highest profile organization to have a lapse in its security, it certainly is not the only one. Nelson's boyfriend, Roberto Millar, sold cars at Brooklyn's Open Road Audi. It is there, Assistant District Attorneys assert, the defendant mimicked his live-in girlfriend to steal and sell customer financial account information. Beyond these two alleged co-conspirators, Nicola Bennett, the compliance officer at AKAM Associates, Inc., and Karen Chance, a teller at Chase Bank, are alleged to have either accessed, stolen or reproduced customer and client information as well. All told, the defendants collectively are believed to trafficked in social security numbers, dates of birth and bank account information for a solid one thousand people. In doing so, some members of these groups allegedly took over credit card accounts, recruited individuals to get them access to legitimate accounts, and even created fake checks. If nothing else, the crews (if true) where certainly full service providers.

Giving himself a shout out to his prosecutions previously spearheaded by his merry band, Manhattan District Attorney Vance proclaimed: "From ATM skimmers, to waiters stealing credit card info, to the exploitation of systemic weaknesses in bank systems, we are attacking cybercrime and identity theft head on." Sadly, despite his and other law enforcement efforts, the volume and amount of financial loss associated with Identity Theft appears to be exploding in magnitude in New York and well beyond. Prosecutors can and will continue to pursue and investigate these and other fraud schemes, but until they get more support from banks and other institutions they will continually fight an uphill battle.

Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, Crotty Saland PC represents the accused through the New York City area. One of our criminal attorneys, Jeremy Saland, served in the predecessor to the Cybercrime and Identity Theft Bureau.

To learn more about Grand Larceny, Identity Theft and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, please review the CrottySaland.Com website and this blog as well as the NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com website and associated blog at NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com

PROSECUTORIAL AGENCY

Manhattan District Attorney's Office

CRIMES CHARGED

Grand Larceny in the First Degree (NY PL 155.45): Theft of property valued in excess of $1 million. This offense is a "B" felony.

Grand Larceny in the Second (NY PL 155.40): Theft of property valued in excess of $50,000, but not greater than $1 million. This offense is a "C" felony.

Grand Larceny in the Third (NY PL 155.35): Theft of property valued in excess of $3,000, but not greater than $50,000. This offense is a "D" felony.

Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree (NY PL 155.30): Theft of property valued in excess of $1,000, but not greater than $3,000. This offense is a "E" felony.

Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Fourth Degree (NY PL 165.45): Possession of stolen property valued in excess of $1,000, but not greater than $3,000. This offense is a "D" felony.

Identity Theft in the First Degree (NY PL 190.80): Depending on the particular theory or subsection, this crime occurs when there is a use of personal identifying information of another while perpetrating a "D" felony or where services or property is obtained valued in excess of $2,000. This offense is a "D" felony.

Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree (NY PL 170.25): The possession of a fake or fraudulent document, credit card, check or other object that is possessed with the intent to defraud. This offense is a "D" felony.

"B," "C," "D," and "E" felonies are punishable by up to twenty-five, fifteen, seven and four years respectively.

* The above definitions are limited and are not a complete translation of the law. For a complete verbatim reference, review the New York State Penal Law.

THE ACCUSED

YOUNES ABIDAR, MERCY ADEBANDJO, KARRONE ALFRED, JAMEL ANNUZIATA, JAMAAL ANTHONY, NICOLA BENNET, JOSIAH BOATSWAIN, ERICA BROWN, MARK CAMPBELL, KAREN CHANCE, KINO CHARLES,UMAR CREDLE, DIOR KYLE DUMOY, CORNELIUS GARY, CLAUDE GASKIN, JOANNA GIERCZACK, TAFARIE GLASGOW, AJIRE GOLDEN, LIANA GUISCHARD, DAN HAZAN, ALDORAY IRVING, ALTON JAMIESON, ELLORA SMITH JULIUS, CHARLES KELLY, ALRICK CARMEN KOFFI, DEAN MAPP, MOISE, SHAHEIRA MOODY, TRACEY NELSON, ANTHONY PARKER, ANDY PETTITHOME, HANSEY JEAN PIERRE, RICHARD RAMOS, DARRYL RIELY, JESSICA RODRIGUEZ, KURT RUSSELL, LAQUASHIA SEABERRY, DARRYL SYNCON, CHRISTOPER TENN, JONATHAN TUCKER, NICOLE LEACH VITALIS, EVELYN WALKER, JETANE WEBSTER, BRANDON WHITE, CARLOS WHITE, SHAUN WILLIAMS

"Go get 'em, Cy!" That was likely the cheer that echoed through the halls of TD Bank corporate headquarters after the Manhattan District Attorney and his troops announced the indictment and arrest of 94 individuals in an alleged check fraud and Grand Larceny ring that pilfered approximately $450,000 from the global bank. While the loss of $450,000 has absolutely no impact on the bottom line of such a large institution, and is likely viewed merely as one of the many costs of doing business in the 21st century, such a theft is significant in terms of consumer and banker confidence and security. The alleged fraudsters may have believed they were in a real life Staples commercial when they allegedly looted approximately 90 accounts and spent the ill gotten gains on cards and dice at area casinos (Hey, "That was easy."), but they were certainly wrong. The sad reality for the accused is that many of those arrested now face up to fifteen years in state prison. Reminiscent of the Queens District Attorney's Office 16 million dollar and 100 plus person indictments charging Enterprise Corruption, Grand Larceny and other crimes, Manhattan prosecutors, like District Attorney Brown's crew, are poised to to send a strong message to would be identity, cyber and check fraud thieves. In fact, taking a page out of the book of his predecessor, Robert Morgenthau, for fighting crimes in the streets and in the suites, DA Cyrus Vance, Jr. stated:

"Our job is to protect New Yorkers, whether on the streets, online, or in the banking system. The most recent cases brought by my Office's Cybercrime and Identity Theft Bureau show how pervasive cyberfraud schemes are, and how they depend on individuals willing to play various criminal roles. Whether you are a ring-leader or a small player, if you are caught committing fraud, you will be prosecuted."

Frankly, DA Vance is right and he is assertive in his position. Although any indictment is merely an accusation, whether the theft amount is large or small, involves a few individuals or is a criminal enterprise, no organized act of Grand Larceny is insignificant in the eyes of law enforcement.

According to reports and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office press release (check out the piggy bank symbolizing bank accounts...it brings a touch of "fun" to an otherwise serious situation) prosecutors claim that the alleged band of thieves was run by men and recruiters who payed a couple of hundred dollars to individuals who would open up bank accounts. Once open, bad checks, wire transfers or other monies were deposited into the accounts. Although the alleged bad guys knew the money would ultimately not clear and checks would bounce, the defendants accessed and withdrew the money before the banks waited for the checks to clear. With the money in hand, nearly half a million dollars, the ring leaders allegedly lived like high rollers at Foxwoods Casino and other casinos throughout Atlantic City.

If true, the sad reality of a case like this is that but for the diligence and efforts of prosecutors and law enforcement agents, banks, like TD Bank, would probably not connect the fraud together. While missing the forrest from the trees, the banks would certainly catch a customer who failed to make a timely mortgage payment, but not the alleged large scale fraud rooted out by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. Although they would certainly never publicly admit it, the cost to a bank for similar fraud (dollar wise this case involves the same amount of money as a lower end jumbo mortgage default) is not worth internal bank enforcement. Although my commentary may seem cynical or a little "tongue and cheek," with the relatively weakness in the penal law for crimes relating to Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, Identity Theft and in some cases Grand Larceny, the acceptance by banks of fraud as a cost of doing business, and the overwhelming amount of time it takes to "connect the dots" in a large scale fraud ring, it is clear to see why these types of schemes are the crimes of the future.

As I note in many of my entries assessing alleged large scale scams, what each defendant will set forth as his or her defense will likely play out, like a hand of poker or black jack, over the next few weeks and months. Whether the defendants fold or hit 21... we will all soon find out.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm representing those accused of all crimes throughout New York City and the region. Jeremy Saland, one of our two founding New York criminal lawyers, served in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office for over seven years. During that time, Jeremy served in the Identity Theft Unit Major Case section, the predecessor to the Cybercrime and Identity Theft Bureau.

To learn more about the crimes listed above and below, please follow the highlighted links to CrottySaland.Com as well as the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com. Additional information is available on Crotty Saland PC's new website and blog, NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com and NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com respectively.

Crimes Alleged & Offenses Charged

Grand Larceny in the Second, Third & Fourth Degrees: New York Penal Law 155.40, 155.35 & 155.30

"C," "D," and "E," felonies respectively, these crimes are punishable by up to fifteen, seven and four years. If any of the individuals are predicate felons, mandatory state prison is required. These charges may have been aggregated on an individual basis, but not collectively across defendants as each defendant is not charged with the same degree crime.

Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree: New York Penal Law 170.25

A "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in prison. This offense likely relates to the fake checks or debit cards recovered from an individual. Alternatively, it is possible that he or she had a fake identification of some kind. Without more information, it is difficult to determine.

Conspiracy in the Fourth Degree: New York Penal Law 105.10

An "E" felony, this crime is punishable by up to four years in prison. The crime is tied to the defendants alleged "in cahoots" actions and activities to perpetrate the Grand Larceny criminal scheme. For prosecutors, it enables law enforcement to tie the defendants together into this alleged common fraud. It is important to recognize, however, Enterprise Corruption, a "B" felony with mandatory state prison for even a first time offender, was not charged.

Prosecutorial Agency

Manhattan District Attorneys Office - New York County, New York

Defendants Arrested & Accused

STEVEN ADDISON, TREVOR O. ALLEN, ALEXANDER ANDUJAR, FREDDIE AUSTIN, MADELEINE BALAGUER, JASMIN BARRAGAN, JOHN PAUL BAZIGNAN, TRAVIS BELL, LAURA BERRIOS, DAMIEN BLANKS, JAMALA BLY, DANNY CARDONA, IRIS CARRASQUILLO, VIVIANA CHAPARRO, FRANK CLARK, ISRAEL COLON, LOURDES COLON, CARLOS E. CORTIJO, JOSE CRUZ, JOSE M. CRUZ, VERONICA CRUZ, XOCHEEL CRUZ, SHANE DANIELS, JOANN DEBRO, MILTON DELACRUZ, ERIK DIAZ, JUSTIN DOUGHERTY, SEAN EDWARDS, RICHARD FARGAS, JENNIFER FELDMETH, JONAS FERNANDEZDIOSA D. FIGUEROA, JOSEPH FIGUEROA, NELSON FLORES-ESCOBAR, JOANNA GONZALEZ, CARLTON GOODWIN, TERRENCE M. GUY, ORLANDO GUZMAN, DANIEL HEADLY, JR., HECTOR HERNANDEZ, RAYMOND IRIZARRY, JONATHAN JAIMAN, JEAN JAYSURA, LAVONE KELLY, ERIC LANDRON, JONATHAN LASANTA, ROSA LEON, JAMES LEONARD, LUIS LOPEZ, JOEL LUCIANO a/k/a JOEL TORRES, EMIL MANZANO, JARELISSE MARTINEZ, JOSE MARTIR, CRYSTAL MCAULEY, ANGEL MEDINA, HERMINIA MEDINA, FREDDIE MERCADO a/k/a FREDDIE MERCADO JOUBERT, DAVID MORALES, CARLOS MORENO, DAYNA NIEVES, RAUL PADILLA, JR. JOSE PENA,RAFAEL PEREZ, XIOMARA PEREZ, JEREMIAH PETERSON, ILIANET PONCE, SCOTT RABA, AMADO RIVERA, ANTONIO RIVERA, JORGE RIVERA, JEFFREY RODRIGUEZ, D.O.B., RICARDO RODRIGUEZ, JUAN LUIS ROMAN, STEPHANIE ROMAN, JENNIFER ROSARIO, SABRINA ROSARIO, FRANCY SANCHEZ, GREGORIA SANCHEZ, JOSHUA SANDS, NEREIDA SANTIAGO, PANAMA SMALLS, JEFFREY W. STILL, EDWINA TAYLOR, ALBERTO TORRES, CHRISTOPHER TORRES, JUAN VEGA, ERNESTO VITAL, TOYIA WHITE, SANFORD WILLIAMS, LAKIESHA YOUNG, TAMIKA YOUNG

As I have addressed in the past, theft of a credit card or debit card in New York City, and in any of the surrounding boroughs or counties, will result in (at least) the felony charge of Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree, NY Penal Law 155.30(4). Certainly anyone facing such a charge should consult with New York criminal defense attorney experienced in credit card crimes as the felony they would face is punishable by up to four years in prison. But what about credit card fraud (whatever that actually means!)? Will a perpetrator of credit card fraud be charged with a felony? Are there other charges that may accompany a credit card fraud charge? What evidence does the State of New York have to bring to prove credit card fraud? Let's briefly address these questions here. After all, it is important to understand the seriousness of the charges a New Yorker can face if they perpetrate one of these crimes.

In New York, one of the crimes credit card fraud will result in is a charge of New York Penal Law 170.10(1) Forgery in the Second Degree. A "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in state prison, Forgery in the Second Degree is a relatively common crime. You are guilty of Forgery in the Second Degree if you fraudulently sign the name of the actual holder of the credit card or debit card on a written instrument (i.e. the transaction receipt). Similar to theft of a credit or debit card, forgery in the second degree does not turn on the value of goods stolen (i.e. the items you purchased by signing the false name on the receipt). If you forged a signature without authority and with the intent to defraud the credit card company and/or the store (or the cardholder for that matter), then you are guilty of Forgery in the Second Degree. It is fairly scary that this one bogus signature has enormous criminal ramifications.

Moreover, such a Second Degree Forgery charge involving credit or debit card use is rarely prosecuted alone. If you have signed a false name (or scribbled what appeared to be a name) on the credit card you will also likely face the charge of Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree NY Penal Law 170.25, also a "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in state prison. According to the New York Penal Law, "[a]person is guilty of [C]riminal [P]ossession of a [F]orged [I]nstrument in the [S]econd [D]egree when, with knowledge that it is forged and with intent to defraud, deceive or injure another, he utters or possesses any forged instrument." Because that definition is not very helpful, the following will better illustrate this crime. Once you sign the credit card receipt, thereby committing Forgery in the Second Degree, you have created a completed forged instrument- the receipt with the forged signature. The key for the prosecution is to show that you intended to defraud the parties on the other end of the transaction- the store and the credit card company.

Does this sound a little confusing? Well, let's examine a case that will serve as a good illustration of these two charges: People v. Lewandowski, 255 A.D.2d 902. The defendant used a corporate credit card from her former employer to purchase gasoline and food. The defendant signed the name of her brother, the vice-president of the corporation, although she no longer was working for the company and did not have the authorization to use that card. There were two credit card receipts with a forged signature (she possessed the forged instrument!). Therefore, the defendant was convicted of Forgery in the Second Degree pursuant to NY P.L. 170.10(1) and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree pursuant to NY P.L. 170.25. Although the value of the gasoline and food was low, Ms. Lewandowski still faced a felony charge because forged the theft involved credit card fraud. The only issue on appeal was whether the defendant's confession was a complete statement of guilt, and because it was corroborated with the brother's testimony the appellate division ruled that there was sufficient evidence to uphold the conviction.

This case is a standard example of credit card fraud that occurs in New York, which can result in a conviction of Forgery in the Second Degree and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument. If you sign a false name on a receipt with a credit card or debit card purchase you have committed a felony (regardless of the value of property taken!) under New York law. As much as I wish I could say we are all done, there are two more points that are worth noting. Frist, if you criminal attorney is knowledgeable about these statutes, ask him or her whether or not you can be convicted of forging the same forged instrument you are also alleged to possess. Second, it's important to understand that often time the type of Forgery mentioned above is the basis of another serious felony. Identity Theft in the First Degree (NY P.L. 190.80), also a "D" felony, is that offense.

To better educate, and defend, yourself against credit card fraud related crimes, follow the highlighted links above. Further New York criminal law and criminal defense resources maintained by Crotty Saland PC include:

CrottySaland.Com: A complete New York criminal defense website addressing countless criminal statutes in the white collar, street crime, violent crime, weapon crimes, vehicular crime, property crime and desk appearance tickets arena. Content also addresses the arrest process.

NYDeskAppearanceTicket.Com: A website a dedicated to misdemeanor offenses and desk appearance tickets in New York City.
NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com: A website with substantial materials on New York's theft and larceny crimes from shoplifting and embezzlement to extortion and credit card theft.

NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com: A blog containing insight and analysis not only on criminal statutes found in the New York Penal Law, but legal decisions interpreting those crimes and cases playing out in the New York City area media.

NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com: Similar to the blog above that exclusively addresses white-collar theft crimes.

Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland PC represent those accused of crimes through the New York City region.

Queens District Attorney Richard Brown keeps motoring on obtaining one Enterprise Corruption indictment after another. Whether the top prosecutor in Queens is chasing down identity thieves, gamblers or other alleged fraudsters, when he finally catches them he brings out the "big guns" found in the New York Penal Law. According to a press release from earlier today, DA Brown has done it again. Eighteen individuals, arrested for and charged with Enterprise Corruption, Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of Stolen Property, Falsifying Business Records, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and Conspiracy, are all alleged to be part of an auto loan fraud scheme. It appears that obtaining indictments against these individuals was not enough to satisfy DA Brown's voracious appetite for justice as he also obtained indictments for three separate corporations.

According to prosecutors, eighteen individuals and three corporations have been
indicted for their alleged roles in two massive automobile loan fraud schemes that resulted in nearly two million dollars in losses to 18 financial institutions on 47 loans. A fairly basic, yet lucrative, scheme it is alleged that the defendants were involved in obtaining loans to purchase high end automobiles - BMWs, Mercedes, Porsches - with the assistance of "straw borrowers." These borrowers had good credit that enable them to allegedly purchase vehicles that were later resold or rented on the black market and used in criminal activities.

The scheme is alleged to have been perpetrated as follows: (1) A "straw borrower" would obtain bank loan through the use of their good credit. (2) The "straw borrower" would share his/her personal information so that a "straw purchaser" could buy a vehicle with that loan. (3) After a few payment periods, the "straw buyer" or whoever was in charge of payment, would default on the loan. (4) Because of the agreement between the automobile dealerships and the banks, after a few payments were made, the "straw buyer" or the bank would be liable for the loan and not the car dealership. As a result, the car dealership, which may have been in cahoots, would get the money free and clear. (5) During some of the purchases, it is alleged that cars were not actually bought even though the car dealerships received the loan money from the victim banks.

It is alleged that recruiters for this scheme approached "straw borrowers" by promising them kickbacks when the vehicles were either sold or the money for the fraudulent loan obtained for the vehicle was dispensed. Further, it is claimed by prosecutors that "straw borrowers" were told payments would be made and the borrower's credit would increase as a result. Despite these alleged promises, the loans went into default.

As a result of this investigation, prosecutors believe that not only were individual fraudsters involved in the nearly two million dollar scheme, but that loan companies and car dealerships aided in the fraud.

The Criminal Charges

Briefly, the charges against the defendants and the companies are as follows:

Enterprise Corruption: A "B" felony requiring mandatory prison for a first time offender up to twenty five years. Likely tied to the allegations that the crew had a structure and common purpose to make money for the criminal enterprise.

Grand Larceny in the Second and Third Degrees & Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Second and Third Degrees: "C" and "D" felonies punishable by up to fifteen and seven years in prison respectively. These charges appear to be associated with the individual loan thefts from the bank as well as the possession of the stolen funds. Because there were numerous victims, the crimes of Grand Larceny were not aggregated into one single offense of Grand Larceny in the First Degree for a theft in excess of one million dollars.

Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree: A "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in prison. This crime likely relates to fraudulently completed loan paperwork and other documents.

Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree: An "E" felony punishable by up to four years in state prison. This crime is associated with the falsely drafting, writing and completing information on loan applications and other documents that were used in the course of the bank's business.

Conspiracy in the Fifth Degree: An "A" misdemeanor punishable by up to one year. While this crime is not "heavy," it is used to tie together other acts that may not be admissible and to give prosecutors jurisdiction where they may not have it otherwise.

The Defendants

DICKENSON ENTERPRISE (12 defendants)

Duane Box, Danien Brown, Ernest Butler, Andre Dickenson, Alain Galette, Natasha Green, Maurice Hayes, Marvin Jackson, Christopher Lewis, Adrian Sylvester, Carl Tappin, Christopher Vincent

NDAULA ENTERPRISE (9 defendants)

Quate Alexander, Yusekbek Makhamadaliev, Alexander Ndaula, Quiet Money Realty LLC (a.k.a. EZ Approval Auto Sales and Leasing LLC), Rear Guard Enterprises, Ronda Richardson, Luis Santiago, Alain Saint Phard, Silver Arrow Auto Sales,

Where

Queens County Supreme Court Criminal Term

Whether prosecutors' allegations hold water and what defenses the accused will pursue in the next few weeks will certainly be seen. Make no mistake. Assistant District Attorneys and their adversaries representing the defendants have significant work ahead of them.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors. The New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland PC represent the accused throughout the New York City region.

To learn more about the crimes listed above including Enterprise Corruption, Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and Falsifying Business Records, please follow the highlighted links.

Additional information on these crimes ranging from analysis of legal decisions, criminal statutes and newsworthy cases, is also available on the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com. Within the next week, Crotty Saland PC's new website and blog, NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.com and NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com will be "live" with significant information on New York's theft and larceny laws.

While they may be best known for serving choice cut steaks, a few of New York's most famous steakhouses may need to add an arrest profile to their Zagat's ratings. According to reports, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr.'s prosecutors busted a credit card fraud ring allegedly run by men and women whose day jobs were to serve as waiters at some of New York's flagship restaurants. From Smith and Wollensky, Capital Grille and Wolfgang's Steakhouse in Manhattan to Morton's in Stamford and the Bicycle Club in New Jersey, it is alleged that more than two dozen arrested waiters dined on patrons' credit card numbers as their unsuspecting customers grazed on filet mignon, porterhouse and the occasional rib eye (bone in, of course). Although the allegations have yet to fully materialize, it is alleged that these waiters stole approximately fifty account numbers from the high-end credit cards, including the fabled American Express Black Card, and used these account numbers to go on expensive shopping sprees.

The means by which these accused waiters perpetrated the Enterprise Corruption, Identity Theft (although not technically charged with this crime), Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and other crimes is clear. The alleged fraudsters used hand held skimming devices to kick off the alleged scam. Fairly easy to purchase online, these devices can be hidden in one's palm and can scan a credit card in the time it takes to take one swipe. Once the reader glides over the magnetic strip, the account number is then stored for later use. Armed with the credit card numbers, the alleged defendants then encoded a new credit card with the stolen account number.

In two distinct twists that I have seen as a former Manhattan prosecutor and member of the Identity Theft Unit Major Case section, the fraudsters would encode either a completely fake credit card with the stolen account number or a "real" credit card that may have expired or is no longer legitimately being used. Depending how advanced or eager a team of thieves was, either a fraudulent identification was used to match the fake credit card or the legitimate matching identification was utilized where the credit card was a modified, yet properly issued, instrument. It is worth noting that in schemes such as these, a retailer or service provider who accepts the encoded credit card can often catch the fraudster if he or she is diligent. In many cases, a receipt that is printed contains the name of the proper or correct cardholder. While the name on an encoded card and fake identification will match, the name printed on the receipt will reflect the rightful accountholder.

In this arrest and indictment, the alleged credit card fraudsters used over $1,000,000 in ill-gotten gains to make purchases at high-end stores including Chanel. In fact, according to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office press release "[s]earch warrants executed yesterday in conjunction with the investigation resulted in the seizure of luxury goods, including more than $1 million worth of luxury watches and a cache of expensive wine, and...$1.2 million in cash; as well as skimming devices and the equipment necessary to manufacture fraudulent credit cards and driver's licenses."

What will be interesting to learn as this case develops is what roles did each person have. Although prosecutors have alleged it existed, was this crew truly a criminal enterprise and therefore subject to Enterprise Corruption? Merely because prosecutors give titles to or characterize defendants as "manager," "skimmer," "shopper" and "complicit customers" does not automatically mean there is an ascertainable structure where the members all worked toward the single criminal goal. Certainly, if true, these defendants will face a significant risk of prison.

Additionally, what, if anything, did these defendants state when they were arrested? Do prosecutors have video surveillance of purchases, signatures on fraudulent receipts or records linking certain waiters serving customers whose cards were later compromised? While I have my ideas of possible means to defend against these allegations, what defense strategy will ultimately prevail? Again, many of the defendants are charged as part of the criminal enterprise and are facing mandatory state prison on a "B" felony if convicted. A defense needs to be identified and implemented soon.

Although many people may wish that it was, Identity Theft is not going away. While many New York's may have been rightfully concerned when Jimmy McMillin preached during the gubernatorial election that the "rent is too damn high," denizens of the Big Apple should have a much greater concern. Make no mistake. Identity Theft is too damn easy.

WHO: Approximately two dozen waiters at top New York City and suburban steakhouses including Smith and Wollensky, Capital Grille, Wolfgang's, Morton's and the Bicycle Club. Defendants include: RICHARD BERTELETTI, JACOB BLUMENFRUCHT, ERIC BRAHMS, EMILY BRUMFIELD BRAHMS, DANIEL BURNS, ELLE CHONG ROZAN a/k/a ELOISE A. CHONG, ANTHONY COFFARO, MICHAEL DEJESUS, JOSE FELIX FERNANDEZ, KENNETH FRANQUIZ, DAVOR GONCIN, IZAK IRWIN GUTMAN, LUIS DAMIAN JACAS, a/k/a DAMIEN JACES, EDDIE KYLE, ANTHONY MARRA, PETER McGUIRE, JENNIFER MORGAN, JAMES O'CONNELL, RICHARD REICHBACH, TASHA ROSENHAUS, MARTHA RUBIANO, SASHA SCOLLIN and BRIAN TORREY.

ALLEGATION: Swiping and stealing high-end credit card account numbers from patrons, encoding fraudulent credit cards with that information and using the credit cards to make purchases.

CRIMES: B felony of Enterprise Corruption. Minimum of one to three years and maximum of eight and one third to twenty five years in prison for a first time offender. C felony of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree. Potential punishment up to five to fifteen years for a first time offender. D felony of Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree. Potential punishment of up to two and one third to seven years in prison for a first time offender. E felonies including Conspiracy in the Fourth Degree, Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree and Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree. Potential punishment of up to one and one third to four years in prison for a first time offender.

PROSECUTING AGENCY: Manhattan District Attorney (New York County)

To learn about the New York crimes of Enterprise Corruption, Identity Theft, the multiple degrees of Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and other offenses, please follow the highlighted links back to CrottySaland.Com. There you will also find links to the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com where you will find analysis of not merely criminal statutes, but legal decisions interpreting those statutes and reviews of cases in the New York area news. In addition to these resources, the New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland PC anticipate that NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com and associated blog at NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com will have further relevant and practical information on white collar theft offenses once they go "live" by the end of November 2011.

Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm representing those accused of white collar, theft and fraud crimes throughout the New York City region.

According to Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes, a scamming former stock broker managed to cheat and lie his way back into the 1% at the expense of fellow one percenters and on the backs of the 99% as well. While the arrest and indictment of Boris Shteyngart will likely not stop the #OWS from disrupting lower Manhattan on Thursday, it may send a strong message to would be thieves in Kings County. It is alleged in a multi-count indictment that Shteyngart defrauded a dentist from the "Show Me State" out of $142,000 and an 84 year old retiree out of $10,00 which consisted of a significant portion of the latter's life savings. All of this, according to Brooklyn prosecutors, was stolen and used to support Shteyngart's lifestyle.

DA Hynes claims that Shteyngart perpetrated his criminal scheme by "cold calling" potential investors. At some point after his alleged victims began to trust him, Shteyngart would convince these "investors" to send him money by wire transfer or check payable to "Bori." Once he received these checks, prosecutors allege that Shteyngart merely added an "s" next to "Bori." Not rocket science, "Bori" became "Boris" and Shteyngart was able to deposit the checks in his own account. In total, prosecutors believe the scheme netted the defendant approximately $200,000.

The indictment charges Shteyngart with Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, a "C" felony punishable by as much as five to fifteen years for a first time offender. Additionally, the indictment charges the defendant with the "D" felonies of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree and Forgery in the Second Degree. Both of these crimes are punishable by up to two and one third to seven years in state prison. An "E" felony, the indictment also charges Shteyngart with Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree. This offense is the least significant felony crime, but is still punishable by up to one and one third to four years in prison. Beyond these felonies, Shteyngart is also charged with Criminal Impersonation in the Second Degree, an "A" misdemeanor.

Although the Brooklyn District Attorney's Office press release indicates that the defendant faces up to 40 years in state prison, such a sentence is far from likely. While many factors, including Shteyngart's ability to pay back his victims, may mitigate his conduct, according to press coverage of the case, the defendant is not trying to mitigate his actions. In fact, his attorney has publicly denied the allegations and asserted that investigators rushed to judgment. For Shteyngart's sake, I hope his attorney is right.

On an interesting side note, this indictment comes on the heals of another white collar bust in Manhattan where Cyrus Vance, Jr. announced the indictment of three men in a debit card skimming scheme that allegedly netted the accused nearly $300,000 from numerous victims. Both these indictments make it overwhelmingly clear that white collar, larceny and theft crimes are still thriving in New York and beyond.

To learn more about the crimes of Grand Larceny, and Forgery, please follow the highlighted links above to the Crotty Saland website. There you will not only find detailed information about these statutes, but links to the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com. The blog, another excellent source of information, contains analysis of criminal statutes, legal decisions further defining those crimes, and cases that have played out in the New York City news.

Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland PC represent those accused of white collar crimes throughout the New York City region.

Additional resources for New York larceny crimes can be found at the NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com website and NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com going "live" in the next couple of weeks.

Well before I became a New York criminal lawyer, I served for over seven years as a prosecutor in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. During that time, I was appointed to the Identity Theft Unit upon its creation as well as the Major Case section where I investigated criminal networks immersed in multi-million dollar Identity Theft schemes. Many of these schemes crossed continents and involved dozens of individuals. None, however, were as large scale in terms of the number of people charged and arrested in Queens County. In fact, according to the Queens County District Attorney's Office, District Attorney Richard Brown may have the "honor" of spearheading the largest Identity Theft scheme in the history of such cases in terms of individuals involved. That number, to be precise, is one hundred eleven. These defendants were indicted by a Queens Count Grand Jury for their various degrees of involvement in forged credit card and Identity Theft rings. While the crimes of Forgery, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and Identity Theft are all felonies with a serious bite, prosecutors have flexed their muscles by also obtaining indictments for Enterprise Corruption, New York's RICO statute.

Although "only" eighty-six of the defendants are in custody, Queens prosecutors claim that fake and fraudulent credit cards were created and used by these individuals to steal well north of thirteen million dollars during a sixteen month period. Thousands of American Express, Visa, MasterCard and Discover Card customers were the alleged victims. Additionally, some of the crew are even alleged to have perpetrated burglaries and robberies at Kennedy Airport and the Citigroup Building in Long Island City where they allegedly netted close to a million dollars of ill-gotten gains.

According to the "Operation Swiper" press release:

"[T]he defendants fraudulently obtained credit card account numbers through various means and which were then used to manufacture forged credit and identification cards. Once the counterfeit cards were created, according to the indictments, they were ultimately given to teams of 'shoppers' who were sent out on shopping expeditions in New York, Florida, Massachusetts, Los Angeles and other areas of the United States to purchase high-end electronics and other merchandise - such as designer handbags, game consoles and jewelry - which either had been requested or could easily be fenced and re-sold, typically over the Internet.

It is alleged that during the shopping sprees, some of the shoppers used forged credit cards to stay at such five-star hotels as the Fontainbleau and The Royal Palm in Miami Beach and the Las Casitas Village, the high-end private villas of the El Conquistor in Puerto Rico. They are also alleged to have used forged credit cards to rent such luxurious automobiles as Lamborghinis and Porsches and, in one instance, a private jet to take them from New York to Florida."

Although this ring may be the largest, it is far from unique or original in its matter of alleged scheming. For example, collusive merchants, businesses that were "in" on the fraudulent credit card transactions, would allegedly permit the fraudsters to use the credit cards at their businesses. Also, holders of the fake credit cards attempted to "bust out" the accounts. "Bust outs" have been a trade of identity thieves and credit card fraudsters for some time. In "bust out" cases, credit cards are often maxed out and paid off with a fraudulent payment that is credited. Shortly thereafter, the payment bounces. By the time the credit card company recognizes this (or actually cares - its the price of doing business to them), the fraudster has doubled or tripled the maximum credit limit. Additionally, fake credit cards were made to be used with fake identification. Embossed on these cards was the real accounts of the alleged victims. None of this, although enormous in scale, is new or unique. The problem for the defendants, however, is that they may be liable not only for the aggregate loss of the particular thefts they were involved in, but they are charged as a criminal enterprise or organized crime.

It will be interesting to see how the defenses and deals play out. Will prosecutors look to plea out lower level players and concentrate on higher level defendants? Will misdemeanor offers be made or will there be a hard line stance on felonies? Even if offers are made, was the group truly a "criminal enterprise" in that there was an actual structure amongst these men and women who also shared a common goal to benefit that enterprise. Alternatively, was this a loose group of individuals who neither knew nor took orders from superiors? Do these defendants have a factual or legal defense?

Should these defendants be convicted of Enterprise Corruption (NY PL 460.20), there is a mandatory minimum of one to three years in prison for a first time offender. Regardless, anyone can face up to twenty-five years in jail. Beyond Enterprise Corruption, the defendants are all charged with one or more of the following: Grand Larceny in the Third Degree (NY PL 155.35), Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree (NY PL 155.30), Identity Theft in the First Degree (NY PL 190.80) and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree (NY PL 170.25). Because the alleged thefts involved numerous different people, the thefts were not aggregated all together, but into lesser felony crimes. These Grand Larcenies are "D" and "E" felonies punishable by up to seven and four years in state prison respectively. Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and Identity Theft in the First Degree are "D" felonies as well.

To better understand the crimes of Enterprise Corruption, Identity Theft, Grand Larceny and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, follow the respective links. There you will find a wealth of information on these crimes including analysis of relevant legal decisions and cases in the news. Additionally, the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com and NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com (going "live" in November 2011) has extensive information on these and other crimes.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors. One of our criminal defense attorneys, Jeremy Saland, served in the Identity Theft Unit and Major Case section where he investigated and prosecuted multi-million dollar Identity Theft schemes.

WHERE: Queens County
WHAT: Identity Theft and Forged Instrument Rings
WHO: The arrested, indicted or target defendants are Imran Khan, Travis Lootawan, Jonathan Ortiz, Wilfredo L. Rodriguez, Edward Solomon, James Morgan, Leroy Linton, Ali Khweiss, Myles Beepath, Carlos Plaza, Ali Khweiss, Vishnu S. Harilal, Lilian Mera, Vincent Mineo, Regan Solomon, Jessica Torres, Justin DeJesus, Nicholas Hines, Alvin A. Lootawan, Nelson Feliciano, Mahendra A. Lootawan, Stacy Manbahaul, Steven A. Bahadur, Imran Ibrahim, Susan Persaud, Samantha Ramgulam, Kendall McClean, Devin W. Quinones, Travis Hassang, Anthony Martin, Jacklyn Gunn, Leidy Rodriguez, Christopher Dwhaj, Fnu Gustawian, Benny Ahoo Adhoot, Ali Khweiss, Travis Lootawan, Jonathan Ortiz, Wilfredo Rodriguez, Leroy Linton, Ravindra Singh, Matthew Thompson, Sarah Genere, Leidy Rodriguez, Ziad Mohamed, Danielle Fernandez, Victoria Duran, Kah Sheng Poh, Sanjay Deowsarran, Irina Pervukhina, Svetlana Turakaeva, Romel Mangel, Sayeed Mohammed, Maria Hernandez, Dallas Chester, Julia Fair, Alexey Vaselevith Koltyga, Reginald McMillian, Tina Mahabir, Allen Lam, Amar Singh, Neha Punjabi-Singh, Randolph Ramroop, Terrance Singh, Ravi Ramroop, Pedro Manuel Guzman-Cuevas, Syson Laguerre, Kamal Sanasi, Ahmar Lacorte, Margaret Mortel, Faried Mohamed, Sunil Ramroop, Kamal Sanasie, Michael Doodnarine, Darren Percival, Andre Shewtjon, Ericka Kidd, Sheena Franklyn, Kesho Baboolal, Angelika Wronowska, Derrick Singh, Parisam Itwaru, Tahidul Parvaz, Michael Tumasar,

The pressure and drive to exceed in school never ends. Instead of studying a little longer and a little harder, however, the answer for some students is figuring out the best shortcut. According to the Kathleen Rice and the Nassau County District Attorney's Office, Sam Eshaghoff, a former University of Michigan and current Emory student, was arrested after sitting for the SAT on behalf of at least a half a dozen high school students in exchange for thousands of dollars. Not a full fledged criminal enterprise, but more than an amateur operation, its further alleged that Eshaghoff sat for the SAT on Long Island at schools where administrators would not know the real students. Further, it is claimed that Eshagoff was armed with fake and phony New York State drivers licenses.

As interesting and as appealing as this case is, I have witnessed these types of scams on a much larger and even an international scale. As a Manhattan prosecutor, I led the investigation and prosecution of approximately two dozen individuals for either fraudulently taking or paying another person to take the GRE, GMAT and TOEFL. Education Testing Service (ETS) administers these examinations as well as the SAT. The Manhattan criminal enterprise, which extended well beyond the borders of New York and the United States, was extensive. Using faking passports at examinations centers and providing fraudulent diplomas, recommendation letters, transcripts, bank statements and other materials to universities and colleges throughout the United States, hundreds of students began their studies not on merit, but on fraud. In fact, the investigation revealed these students enrolled at NYU Stern School of Business, Columbia University Teachers College, Baruch College, UCLA, University of Michigan, Tulane Medical School, Canada's McGill University and many other prestigious institutions.

Although DA Rice has already announced in her press release that she only charged and arrested Eshaghoff, a Great Neck, Long Island High School graduate, for Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree, Falsifying Business Records in the Second Degree and Criminal Impersonation in the Second Degree, much more serious charges could have been brought if prosecutors did a little more homework. Other than Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree, an "E" felony punishable by up to four years in prison, the other offenses charged by Ms. Rice are misdemeanors. If prosecutors had subpoenaed ETS and obtained the correct documents and properly applied the law to the alleged conduct, other charges would be viable including higher "D" felonies. Moreover, the students who paid for the services could be charged as accomplices for such crimes as possessing a forged drivers license and falsification of records at ETS used prior to and as part of the SAT. More specifically, all parties could face Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree (false drivers license) and Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree (causing a false entry to be made while furthering a Scheme to Defraud, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument or even Identity Theft).

In the Manhattan District Attorney's Office prosecution of the professional test taking ring, we went as far as charging Identity Theft in the First Degree although no actual "theft" occurred. Briefly, the theory of that charge was that the test takers utilized personal identification of the students with the intent to defraud ETS and various colleges or make a fraudulent passport (in the current case against Eshaghoff the identification is a drivers license). Although there was no theft because students voluntarily gave their information, the Identity Theft statute does not contain the "permission and authority language." This theory of Identity Theft where one permits the use of his or her personal information by another to defraud was cutting edge. To combat the charges, some of the criminal defense lawyers argued that there was no "intent to defraud" because good will, a potential position at a school, or the integrity of the testing process, unlike cash or property, was not the type of fraud intended by the statute. Unfortunately for those defendants, that defense failed.

Make no mistake. There are hard working, honest, diligent students who strive to better themselves and their education. Most of them do not have the means to pay others to do their work. Even if prosecutors can "throw the book" at these teens, what happens to their futures should be more important than a press release and a "tough on crime" stance. If true, all of their actions were unquestionably wrong. A desire to get ahead in life cannot be substituted with the intent to scam and cheat. Hopefully, however, prosecutors give these students the opportunity to learn from their mistakes, pay back society, and show that they have the ability to become valuable members of their communities.

For a wealth of information about Identity Theft, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, Falsifying Business Records and Criminal Impersonation please follow the respective links. Additionally, the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com has extensive information on these and other crimes as well as analysis of legal decisions, statutes and cases in the news. Coming in the end of October, Crotty Saland PC's new website and blog - NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com and NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBog.Com - will be another resource for material on New York theft and larceny crimes.

Founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, the New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland PC represent the accused throughout the New York City region.

As both a New York criminal lawyer and as a Manhattan prosecutor, I have faced the issue of determining the legal value of property in a Grand Larceny case that was not readily apparent. While a theft of cash or certain property is easily ascertainable based on market value or the actual value of the currency, some items are not as clear. Fortunately, for prosecutors, criminal attorneys, victims and the accused, New York's theft statutes set forth a guideline to follow. More specifically, certain written instruments, not including such items as some public and corporate bonds, have a value as calculated as established in New York Penal Law 155.20(2).

Regardless of whether or not a written instrument has actually been issued or delivered, a value has to be placed on those items to determine not only the degree of the Grand Larceny charged in a New York court, but to also come up with a restitution number should "payback" be part of any disposition. Accordingly, NY PL 155.20(2) deciphers the calculations as follows:

NY PL 155.20(2)(a)

If the written instrument in question establishes a debt such as a promissory note ore a personal check, the value of that check or promissory note is the value that is due. Ordinarily, according to the statute, this amount is a combination of the face value, ie, the amount drafted or written on the check, less what has been already paid back or satisfied. An interesting question, and one which will be addressed in another blog entry, is if the stolen check is drafted in an amount that exceeds funds available, does the amount drafted still the bar for determining value? Furthermore, if there never were proper funds to back the amount indicated, is the crime a factually impossible crime to commit, and, if so, is it possible to merely attempt that crime as opposed to actually complete it? If the answer is the latter, then the crime, as an attempt, would be a full degree less than the completed offense.

NY PL 155.20(2)(b)

The value of a ticket or similar document that gives an individual the right to obtain transportation (flight, bus, train, etc.) or to obtain some form of entertainment (movie, concert, football game, etc.), is fairly straight forward. Whatever the price listed on the ticket is, that is the value for the purpose of a larceny or theft crime in New York. If that value is $1,000 or less, then the crime would be a Petit Larceny (NY PL 155.25). If the value exceeds $1,000, then the theft crime would be a degree of Grand Larceny. A more complex question is how to determine the value when it is not drafted on the ticket. In such circumstances, the price paid for the ticket or an equivalent ticket would be utilized to ascertain value.

NY PL 155.20(2)(c)

In more complicated cases involving thefts of written instruments that may impact a legal right or obligation of value, the value of that particular written instrument is established by determining first whether or not the owner of the instruments might reasonably suffer due to the loss of the instrument. If he or she would suffer a loss, the value is the economic loss he or she would reasonably expect as a result of the loss. Clearly, these cases are much more speculative in nature.

It is worth noting that even the brightest of judges, prosecutors and criminal attorneys cannot agree on value. Grand Larceny and the valuation of property is far from easy outside a straight forward Embezzlement scheme. Fortunately, the burden, however, always rests with an assistant district attorney and not the defendant. If the value cannot be specifically established or proven by any party, there is still something for prosecutors to fall back on. In cases where the value is inconclusive, NY PL 155.20(4) allows for a legal finding that the value of the property is less than $250.

For a wealth of practical and easily digestible materials on New York Grand Larceny, please follow the hyperlinks above to the Crotty Saland website's Grand Larceny location. Alternatively, the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com as well as NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com are both tremendous resources on usable information pertaining to theft and larceny statutes, crimes and legal decisions.

Founded by two former Manahttan prosecutors, the attorneys at Crotty Salan PC represent the accused throughout the New York City region.

In an earlier entry relating to Extortion, a subset of Grand Larceny, I identified and differentiated the difference between the Grand Larceny Extortion statutes found in New York Penal Law sections 155.05(2)(e) and 155.40(2). This entry will deal with the criminal defense to the crime of Extortion in NY that is established by statute. Whether this affirmative defense is relevant or applicable to the Grand Larceny and Extortion allegation in your particular case, that is something to identify and asses with your New York criminal defense attorney and Extortion lawyer.

Pursuant to New York Penal Law section 155.15(2):

In any prosecution for larceny by Extortion that is perpetrated by instilling fear in the target of the Extortion that the target or another person will be charged with a criminal offense, it is an affirmative defense that the extorter reasonably believed the alleged charge was accurate. Beyond this belief that the alleged criminal conduct of the extortee, the single purpose of the extorter must solely be to compel the extortee to take "reasonable action to make good the wrong which was the subject of such threatened charge."

Dissecting this defense, it is critical that an extorter truly and genuinely believe that the crime committed by the extortee be true. Obviously, this will be an issue of fact. Additionally, even if the belief is true and even if the extortee actually committed a crime, the only purpose permitted by this defense for the actions of the extorter is to rectify and fix the "wrong" that the extortee allegedly perpetrated. In other words, the extorter cannot utilize the extortee's criminal act to gain financially in an unrelated matter.

An additional defense to an accusation of Extortion is not found in a statute but is one that the watchful eye of an experienced New York criminal lawyer or Extortion attorney. In the voluminous case law that has evolved around the crime of Grand Larceny by Extortion in New York, the courts have made it overwhelmingly clear that certain terms and words must be set forth in the indictment charging this crime. Unlike common law Grand Larceny where it is sufficient to merely state a Grand Larceny was perpetrated, the prosecution must set forth in an indictment for Grand Larceny by Extortion that the Grand Larceny was in fact not merely a Grand Larceny, but one committed through Extortion. If the prosecution fails to do so, then the indictment should be dismissed.

As a hypothetical, if you stole $5,000 from a woman by taking the money from her account without her permission, the prosecution would not have to set forth with any additional specificity that the crime was anything other than "regular" Grand Larceny in the Third Degree. However, if you stole $5,000 from that same woman by committing the crime of Extortion, the indictment language would have to plead the means by which the theft took place, i.e., Extortion. Although this may seem minor, if the prosecution overlooks this fact your criminal defense attorney should be able to argue that the indictment is not correct or proper. If the indictment is not pleaded properly within its "four corners," you may be looking at a dismissal. Whether the prosecution can or will re-present to the Grand Jury, you certainly will have at least won one significant battle in your criminal case and re-asssess the next phase of your defense.

For detailed analysis of New York Grand Larceny statutes and the subset of Extortion, follow the highlighted link. A wealth of information is also available on the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com. For further information on other larceny and theft crimes in New York, Crotty Saland PC will be publishing the NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyersBlog.Com as well as the sister website, NewYorkTheftAndLarcenyLawyers.Com during the month of October, 2011.

Crotty Saland PC is New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors. The New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland represent the accused throughout the New York City region.

Forgery in the Second Degree, New York Penal Law 170.10, contains specific statutory language. In substance, some of the critical elements are that the accused must have the "intent to defraud" and "falsely make[], create[] or alter[] a written instrument." Moreover, in doing so, a defendant must also have "create[d], transfer[ed], terminate[d] or otherwise affect[ed] a legal right." While the statute also sets forth some specific types of instruments such as wills, a relatively recent appellate court decision (the second highest level court in New York State) refused to elaborate or extend Forgery crimes into other areas. While the decision doesn't necessary preclude Forgery crimes in New York from extending beyond the specific instruments in the statute, it does help set the parameters of how far assistant district attorneys can go when prosecuting Forgery offenses.

In People v. Carmack, 34 A.D.3d 1299 (4th Dept. 2006), the Appellate Division Fourth Department reversed a conviction at trial where the defendant was alleged to have perpetrated Forgery in the Second Degree. There, the accused was alleged to have spoofed email address and sent out solicitations to other email users. In other words, solicitation emails would arrive in one's inbox and appear as if it came from another person or friend as opposed to a general "spam" email. Although the emails were sent from the defendant's computer, a program made it appear as if other entities or people had sent the email when in fact they had not. Finding that emails for a dietary supplement, for example, were not the type of instrument set forth in the statute, the appellate level court reversed the conviction.

Not only did prosecutors overreach in their attempt to stop what they believed was a criminal act in the arena of Forgery, but the judges also reversed the charge of Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device within the meaning of Penal Law 170.40. There, the court noted that an essential element of this crime is that the particular device must be "specifically designed for use in counterfeiting or otherwise forging written instruments.” However, the prosecution's own expert witness testified that the program utilized by the defendant could in fact be used for legitimate purposes.

While this case may or may not be a useful tool in the arsenal of a criminal defense attorney when representing his or her client in a matter involving Forgery or Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device, the concept of the case is an important one. That is, prosecutors, despite their infinite means to investigate and prosecute crimes, must remain within the confines and structures set forth in the statutes they have sworn to uphold.

For a wealth of information, statutes and articles regarding Forgery and related fraud crimes in New York City as well as the State of New York, please review the applicable sections of the Crotty Saland PC website (CrottySaland.Com) and the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog (NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com).

Crotty Saland PC is a white collar criminal defense firm located in Manhattan. Prior to starting the firm, both founding partners served as prosecutors in the New York County District Attorney's Office under Robert Morgenthau.

Whether you have been arrested in New York for Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 175.30) and need to consult with a New York Criminal lawyer or you are the target of a New York City theft scheme involving the crime of Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the First Degree (New York Penal Law 175.35) and want a grasp on the law governing these crimes, Crotty Saland PC's Offering a False Instrument for Filing information page is a good source for education. While no substitute for advice from the attorney with whom you thoroughly vet your particular case, the Offering a False Instrument for Filing information page can provide you with the basic understanding of the crimes in New York.

Generally, the crime of Offering a False Instrument for Filing occurs when you know that a written instrument has false information, but you still present it to a public office (or servant). Further, you must do so knowing or believing that it will be filed in some manner with that public office. The case is increased to the First Degree offense when you also have an intent to defraud. NY PL 175.35 is a felony punishable by up to four years in prison while NY PL 175.30 is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail. It is important to note that many times, the crime of Offering a False Instrument for Filing is associated with other more serious felonies including Grand Larceny, Enterprise Corruption and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument. In other words, Offering a False Instrument for filing is potentially a serious felony, but may only be a smaller part of a more serious scheme.

For in depth information on the crime of Offering a False Instrument for Filing, please follow the highlighted links above. Extensive information on the crimes of Grand Larceny, Enterprise Corruption and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument can be found through their respective links above as well. Beyond the Crotty Saland PC website, information on these and other crimes can be found through a search of the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog where criminal statutes, analysis of legal decisions and commentary on cases in the news can be found.

Established by two former Manhattan prosecutors, Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm focused on defending and representing the accused throughout New York City and the region.

The New York white collar criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Crotty Saland PC are pleased to announce a successful disposition for a client charged in an alleged Enterprise Corruption and Grand Larceny scheme involving multiple millions of dollars. Our client, a physician, had been indicted by a New York County Grand Jury for his alleged involvement in a scheme to perpetrate insurance fraud. It was claimed by prosecutors that phony patients would see the physician as well as his colleagues and that the physician would fraudulently bill medicaid. In all, the State of New York claimed our client, in concert with other physicians and specialists, bilked the government out of more than six million dollars.

Compounding matters, prosecutors alleged in a second indictment that our client had violated a restraining order after much of his assets were frozen. It was alleged that our client accessed certain monies without prior permission. The second indictment charged Contempt and Falsifying Business Records. Our client faced up to eight and one third to twenty five years in prison on the First Enterprise Corruption and Grand Larceny indictment and a consecutive one and one third to four years in prison on the second Contempt and Falsifying Business Records Indictment.

Although it took some time, extensive negotiations and legal wrangling, our client obtained an extremely favorable disposition where he avoided going to state prison and was required to make partial restitution. Although our client accepted some responsibility for his actions, we argued that much of what occurred did so without his knowledge or involvement. The deal obtained for the client by Crotty Saland PC seemed even greater after the other defendants, who refused to negotiate and take some responsibility for their actions, were convicted after a costly trial. The trial not only lasted in excess of six weeks, but the Court sentenced one of the men to one and one half to four and one half years in state prison and the other to two and one half to seven and one half years in state prison. Both were required to pay similar restitution.

For this particular client, the reality was that he was not going to avoid a criminal conviction even though he was not involved in or aware of the scheme in its entirety. Moreover, even if we were successful in litigating the initial indictment, the second indictment was that much more formidable. Fortunately, the New York criminal lawyers at Crotty Saland PC mitigated the offenses and disposed of the two indictments while keeping our client from serving time in state prison.

The former Manhattan prosecutors at Crotty Saland PC represent the accused throughout New York City and the region. Before establishing the criminal defense practice, both founding members served as prosecutors under Robert Morgenthau and were lead prosecutors on multi-jurisdictional and multi-million dollar fraud investigations. For additional information on the crimes listed above, please review the respective links and go to the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog where extensive information on these and other crimes can be found.

Prior Results Do Not Guarantee Future Outcomes

Do I need a New York criminal lawyer? I found a credit card in Manhattan and used that credit card to buy a pair of jeans at Macys for $175. I took my friend's credit card and purchased $600 worth of makeup and other accessories in a Brooklyn store without my friend's permission. I used a credit card that was fake and had another person's account number programmed on to it. What is "credit card fraud" and did I commit it? Can I be charged with a felony or go to prison? What are the crimes and potential charges in New York City for credit card fraud?

The following blog entry is a brief analysis of the potential crimes in New York State relating to credit card theft and possession, use of a stolen credit card, counterfeit and fake credit cards and other offenses. These potential crimes range from "A" misdemeanors punishable by up to one year in jail to "D" felonies punishable by up to seven years in state prison.

New York Penal Law 155.30(4) & 165.45(2)

If you steal or possess a stolen credit card, the potential charge is either Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree (NY PL 155.30(4)) or Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Fourth Degree (NY PL 165.45(2)). Both of these crimes are "E" felonies punishable by up to four years in state prison. It is critical to note that you can be charged with this felony for each credit card you steal or stolen credit card you possess. Moreover, the same crime applies to debit cards as well.

Another important issue with these crimes is as follows. If you are accused, for example, of stealing a purse or possessing a stolen purse that contains credit cards in it, you need not have the explicit knowledge that you possessed a stolen credit card, but that you possessed stolen property. Also, possessing a stolen credit card that is canceled or revoked is no different than possessing an operating credit or debit card.

New York Penal Law 170.10

Forgery in the Second Degree is a "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in state prison. You can be charged with the crime of NY PL 170.10 if and when you fraudulently sign the rightful name of the debit or credit card holder on the transaction receipt. Regardless of the value of the items purchased, if you sign this person's name without their permission or authority and you do so with the intent to defraud the store or the credit card company, then Forgery is the applicable charge. The same is true if you sign an illegible name. As long as you complete or draft this written instrument (i.e, the receipt), then you likely perpetrated this crime. Compounding matters, this Forgery may be the basis of another felony that prosecutors can charge. That felony, as will be discussed later, is Identity Theft in the First Degree.

New York Penal Law 170.25

Criminal Possession of a Forged instrument in the Second Degree, like Forgery in the Second Degree, is a "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in prison. NY PL 170.25 is the "sister" crime to NY PL 170.15. The easiest way to look at this crime in the context of credit card fraud is in two distinct examples. The first occurs where you sign a name to the credit card receipt (the Forgery) and, as a result, create the complete and whole transaction record. This finalized receipt that was complete with the signature is the forged instrument. A second example would occur where the credit card itself is a counterfeit or fake credit card. If you possess this fraudulent credit card that appears to be a legitimate card (maybe it has another person's real name or is encoded with a stolen account number) and you have the intent to deceive another with it, then you will likely be charged with Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree

Regardless of the crime charged, it is extremely important to recognize that even an accusation of a felony can alter, if not destroy, the career of a student, lawyer, physician, teacher or financial services employee. Even without going to prison, what will be revealed on a background check and what certifications or licenses will be compromised? Whether you are a target of an investigation or you have already been arrested, consulting with an experienced criminal defense attorney before speaking to the police, prosecutors or any law enforcement agent is critical. It could be that without your admission or statement, the prosecution's case will not have the same strength and durability against you.

A second entry dealing with credit card fraud in its various forms will address the additional crimes and degrees of Identity Theft and Falsifying Business Records. However, extensive information on these and other crimes are located on the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog and the Crotty Saland website.

Elizabeth Crotty and Jeremy Saland, our two founding New York criminal defense attorneys, served in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office for six and seven years respectively prior to starting the law firm. Our criminal lawyers represent the accused from investigation through trial in the New York City region.