Case Results

June 24, 2014

Jury Finds Saland Law PC Client Not Guilty After Trial: Client Exonerated of Knife Point Kidnapping, Unlawful Imprisonment & Stalking

All too often, criminal defendants face a rightful presumption of innocence coupled with a wrongful assumption of guilt. The greater the severity of the arrest, indictment or allegation, the stronger the negative inference. Although this should not be the case, as New York criminal lawyers this is the reality that we see many of our clients face. In fact, for one particular Saland Law PC client, this presumption-assumption issue followed him for a year after he was arrested and indicted for Kidnapping in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 135.20), Unlawful Imprisonment in the First Degree (New York Penal Law 135.10) and Stalking in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 120.55). Fortunately, however, with diligence and hard work, our client’s presumption of innocence prevailed and the assumption of guilt was put to rest after a jury acquitted our client after trial of Kidnapping, Stalking and Unlawful Imprisonment.

On its face, the allegations against our client were horrific. It was alleged that our client kidnapped his ex-wife at knife point after he used a ruse to deliver her furniture from their former apartment to her home that she shared with her mother and daughters (from a different relationship) on her birthday. The complainant claimed that she had no idea our client was going to move her property, did not have plans with him on her birthday, had no contact with him other than responding to his unwanted texts and calls, and only got inside his vehicle after threats of violence were made. Doubling down, the complainant asserted our client brandished a knife and threatened to kill the complainant as well as her daughters and mother. Driving up to Bear Mountain, the complainant contended she only escaped after convincing our client to go to a diner where she then reached out for help from waitstaff. Compounding the accusation, numerous waitstaff stated that they heard our client repeat the threat to kill the complainant’s mother. Complicating matters further, upon arrest zip ties, duct tape and a rope were recovered form our client’s car. No knife was ever recovered.

May 7, 2014

NY PL 220.16 Drug Felony Reduced to NY PL 220.03 Misdemeanor & Ultimately Adjourned for Dismissal: Client Receives ACD After Prosecutors Alleged Possession of 45 Bags of Heroin with Intent to Sell

by Jeremy Saland

If your client is arrested for and charged with Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Third Degree (New York Penal Law 220.16) for allegedly possessing 45 glassines of heroin with the intent to sell that drug, you certainly engage the Assistant District Attorney when a non jail offer is made to the lesser felony of Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth Degree (New York Penal Law 220.06). After all, the term of imprisonment on a class B felony is from one to nine years in prison upon a conviction. However, despite the apparent generous offer, when prosecutors made this exact offer to a Saland Law PC client, the response was likely not what the Assistant District Attorney expected in such a facially strong case. Whether it could be proven at trial or not, prosecutors filed a felony complaint alleging the police recovered 45 baggies of heroin from our client’s bag. Instead jumping at the offer, having discussed the arrest allegations in great detail with our client, the first question asked of the prosecutor was whether each of the 45 glassines contained heroin in a useable amount or merely residue. If the latter, then it would seem unlikely that our client intended to sell used baggies of heroin. Simply, it does not take a New York criminal defense lawyer (or even more importantly, a prosecutor) to recognize there is no market for used residual narcotics or controlled substances.

Sadly, the prosecutor from this New York City borough refused (yes refused) to answer whether or how many of the glassines contained residue. In substance, the Assistant District Attorney asserted that the information was not discoverable at this stage and the prosecutor was not required to tell the defense pre-indictment. In response, I argued that as a practical matter, the prosecutor should be less concerned about securing a felony conviction and more concerned about pursuing justice. A bad, weak or bogus felony is a bad, weak, or bogus case no matter the crime or its degree. Further, I told the prosecutor that if the bags only contained residue or the vast majority contained residue, then that evidence is what those who practice criminal law refer to as Brady material. In non legal terms, Brady material are those items, documents, recordings and any other physical or no physical information or evidence that tends to or can exculpate a defendant. Here, because the charge was that our client intended to sell heroin, we stated that if the heroin was not consistent with the amount or form that could be sold (again who is purchasing residue or empty glassines), it would exculpate our client in connection to the felony crime of PL 220.16. Disagreeing with us further and refusing to answer ourquestion, the prosecutor compounded matters by refusing to provide a supervisor’s name to discuss further.

February 9, 2014

PL 265.03: New York Firearm & Gun Lawyers Get Two Non-Criminal Deals in Queens Airport Weapon Arrests

by Jeremy Saland

At no point did you believe that your flight home from New York City’s JFK or LaGuardia Airport would leave you stranded in New York. No, not stranded on the tarmac or in the airport, but in a jail charged with Second Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon (New York Penal Law 265.02). You thought you were adhering to the TSA’s rules. You even went online or called your airline to determine how to properly transport your firearm, pistol or revolver. According to JetBlue, Delta, American, or any airline, the transportation of your weapon must comply with certain requirements – requirements you thought you were complying with. Unfortunately, you didn’t know that if you have a firearm or gun that is not registered in New York (NYC has its own registration requirements greater than those in the State of New York) and you go to an airport in Queens (JFK or LaGuardia), you are in possession of an illegal weapon.

Some would argue that your second amendment right is kicked to the curb when you enter the boundaries of New York while others would argue that the legislature and citizens of the Empire State don’t want or need your guns flooding their borders. Regardless of your perspective on the law, “it is what it is.” When you check your hard sided case with an agent and you advise that the weapon is not loaded because the bullets or ammunition are not in the gun, he or she smiles back to you and tells you to wait. In only a matter of minutes you are handcuffed and arrested for Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 265.03) and potentially the lesser (but a still significant and crippling felony) of Criminal Possession of a Firearm (New York Penal Law 265.01-b(1)).

October 16, 2013

Brooklyn DWI Arrest Leads to Disorderly Conduct Due to Potential Mistrial After Cross Examination

by Jeremy Saland

Saland Law PC, a New York City criminal defense firm founded by two former DWI prosecutors and DWI defense attorneys, is pleased to announced a resolution to a case a long time in the making. Although the initial offer required a plea to the misdemeanor crime of VTL 1192.3 (also called “common law DWI”) with an opportunity to later re-plea to Driving While Ability Impaired (“DWAI”) pursuant to New York VTL 1192.1, our client rejected this deal and proceeded to trial. In the midst of the cross examination by Saland Law PC of the New York City Police Department officer who effectuated the arrest, the prosecution offered our client a plea to Disorderly Conduct (New York Penal Law 240.20). Instead of facing a potential conviction that would require our client taking the DDP, being fined hundreds of dollars and having our client’s license suspended, our client’s case was immediately sealed without any conditions.

After the prosecution conducted their direct examination of the officer who arrested our client for DWI (sometimes called “DUI”), Saland Law PC cross examined the witness on numerous inconsistencies between the police paperwork and his testimony. For example, the officer testified at a earlier hearing that the accused drunk driver was traveling westbound on the Belt Parkway, but later contradicted himself. Even more significant, the officer testified inconsistently between the initial hearing and paperwork regarding “watery blood shot eyes.” At trial, the officer testified our client’s eyes were clear. Further, while the prosecution stated in substance that our client drank numerous glasses of wine during the opening statement, the officer testified that our client only admitted to drinking one glass. The list of inconsistencies extended well beyond what is addressed above, but not all of these errors were exposed before the prosecution made an offer mid-trial.

May 6, 2013

New York Criminal Lawyers Get Dismissal of Client’s Weapon Possession Arrest of PL 265.01(2)

by Jeremy Saland

With the amount of blog entries I have recently drafted relating to New York weapon crimes including those involving New York firearm laws and knife arrests, one would think that the criminal lawyers at Saland Law PC spend their days solely defending clients against misdemeanor (New York Penal Law 265.01) and felony (New York Penal Law 265.02 and 265.03) weapon arrests. While we certainly do our best to keep ourselves up to date on the ever changing laws and regulations involving New York weapon crimes, this area of law is remains a significant piece of our criminal defense practice. Irrespective of how often we represent clients accused of possessing legally owned firearms at JFK or LaGuardia airports or gravity knives on the streets of NYC, there can be little dispute that many weapon statutes in New York are enforced with greatest of intentions, but often against honest, “clean” and law abiding people.

In a recent example of a “regular Joe” being ensnared in a New York weapon crime, Saland Law PC represented an attorney accused of possessing a knife with a blade exceeding four inches. Further, when arrested with possessing this knife, both the police and prosecutors at the District Attorney’s Office charged our client with violating New York Penal Law 265.01(2). Not the “per se” section of the New York Penal Law, this subsection of Fourth Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon makes it a crime (in substance) to possess any dangerous instrument (it has a very liberal definition) unlawfully against another person. Keep in mind…under the right circumstances a can of Red Bull or your backpack could be considered a dangerous instrument.

March 2, 2013

Gun Arrest JFK Results in ACD Dismissal: New York Criminal Possession of Firearm Arrest Results in No Record

by Jeremy Saland

In the best of all scenarios, the New York criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan Assistant District Attorneys at Saland Law PC are proud to announce the granting of an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal (commonly called an ACD) on behalf of a client arrested for Second Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon (New York Penal Law 265.03). In a not so atypical set of circumstances, Port Authority Police Officers arrested our client as he attempted to check his legally owned and licensed out-of-state handgun with airline ticket agents at JFK airport (the same would have occurred at LaGuardia Airport). Assuming he was compliant with the law prior to his arrest for NY PL 265.03, our client secured the firearm in a hard side case, removed the ammunition from the pistol and voluntarily advised the airline representatives of his possession. Unfortunately for our client, ignorance of the law is no defense for a Weapon Possession crime and our client faced the wrath of New York’s strict firearm laws.

Whether or not you agree with New York’s gun laws and possession statutes, compliance in one state does not mean compliance in New York. Where your possession would be non criminal elsewhere, your possession of a legally owned and registered out of state firearm in New York City or an airport in Queens becomes a class “C” felony if the gun is loaded. Remember, loaded in the eyes of the law is much more liberal and does not require bullets or ammunition actually in a chamber, cylinder, cartridge, etc.

November 30, 2012

New York Gun Possession Lawyers Get Dismissal in Airport Loaded Firearm Possession Arrest

by Jeremy Saland

There are few things worse than believing you are compliant with the law, but quickly learning you are not. Even more concerning, when the crime involves the possession at an airport of a “loaded” firearm or gun that you believe is properly secured with the ammunition removed, things can look bleak very quickly. Unfortunately, this is the exact scenario a client of the New York criminal lawyers at Saland Law PC faced.

Our client, an individual involved in marketing with publicly known clients, had visited New York for only a few days. An avid sportsman, in terms of going to the range, our client brought his pistol to New York City during his stay. Although our client never used the weapon and kept it in a hard sided case with the ammunition stored separately inside, our client unwittingly violated New York Penal Law 265.03, Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree. In fact, while a reasonable person would believe he or she was in compliance with the law and kept the gun unloaded, the New York criminal law has much more liberal definition of when a weapon is armed. That is, if the weapon is capable of being loaded, such as where the bullets are in the same carrying case, the firearm is loaded for the purpose of a New York weapon arrest and prosecution. As a result, when our client checked his bags and notified airport staff at John F. Kennedy (JFK) Airport (the same would occur if this transpired at LaGuardia Airport) that he had an unloaded firearm, he was detained and arrested.

February 20, 2012

The Value of Investigating a New York Assault Arrest: New York Criminal Lawyers Obtain Dismissal of Felony Assault Case

by Jeremy Saland

Any New York criminal lawyer can tell you an allegation is merely an allegation. It is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, or, for that matter, proof of much at all. Whether you are arrested for a fight involving a neighbor or a stranger, the burden on the prosecution is to not only establish the probable cause that legitimized a police arrest for Assault, but also they burden is on the People to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt. Despite this legal requirement and the recognition that an arrest is not proof of any guilt, allegations are often devastating. For a client of Saland Law PC, this pain was overwhelming until our New York criminal lawyers were able to secure a dismissal in his felony Assault case.

Prosecutors charged our client with Assault in the Third Degree (New York Penal Law 120.00) after our client allegedly struck another man and opened up a laceration on his forehead. Normally a misdemeanor crime, this Third Degree Assault was prosecuted as a felony due to the allegation that the barrages of punches were part of a verbal tirade against the complainant because of the alleged victim’s perceived homosexuality. Under New York State law, a misdemeanor crime can be elevated to a felony offense if it is classified as a “hate crime.”

November 24, 2011

Client with Previous Felony Record Gets Disordely Conduct After Charged with Felony Criminal Mischief

by Jeremy Saland

The New York criminal lawyers at Saland Law PC are pleased to announce a top disposition for a client charged with Criminal Mischief in the Third Degree (New York Penal Law 145.05), Auto Stripping in the Third Degree (New York Penal Law 165.09) and Attempted Petit Larceny (New York Penal Law 110/155.25). The most serious offense, NY PL 145.05, is an “E” felony punishable by up to four years in state prison.

Prosecutors alleged that our client, an individual who had previously been convicted of violating New York Penal Law 265.03 for possessing a loaded firearm, took a brick and smashed it through the back trunk window of a vehicle parked in Manhattan. After allegedly smashing out the window, our client is further alleged to have reached inside the vehicle in the presence of a plain clothes officer and an independent eyewitness. Ultimately, the police arrested our client and the owner of the vehicle assessed the damage at $1,000. Charged with a felony, and previously convicted of a violent felony, prosecutors offered our client a “sweetheart” deal of a misdemeanor plea and restitution. Unhappy with the offer, our client, who was represented by a “public defender,” consulted with and retained Saland Law PC.

September 17, 2011

New York Criminal Lawyers Avoid Criminal Record for Client Charged with Two White Collar Felonies in Manhattan Court

by Jeremy Saland

The New York criminal lawyers and former Manhattan prosecutors at Saland Law PC are pleased to announce that one of our clients pleaded guilty to a violation of Disorderly Conduct after being charged with two felonies of Grand Larceny in the the Third Degree (NY PL 155.35) and Identity Theft in the First Degree (NY PL 190.80) as well as three misdemeanor counts of Forgery in the Third Degree (NY PL 170.05). If convicted, not only would our client have a felony record, but he would have faced up to two and one third to seven years in prison.

It was alleged that our client had perpetrated “credit card fraud” after he randomly received a pre-approved credit card application in his mailbox addressed to another person. Upon completing the application, our client allegedly opened a secondary credit card account under his name. Upon doing so, prosecutors claimed that our client purchased a Honda Accord and filled out a loan application for that vehicle in the amount of $25,000. Using the credit card he allegedly obtained fraudulently, our client charged $7,000 as payment to Honda. As a result of these alleged actions and upon recognition by the creditor bank that there were issues with the use of the credit card, detectives from the New York City Police Department arrested our client. Shortly thereafter, prosecutors charged our client with these felonies in Manhattan.