New York Criminal Lawyer BlogCan I get my misdemeanor conviction sealed from years ago? Can I get my criminal record for a felony expunged? Fortunately, within reason, both New York sealing attorneys and criminal lawyers familiar with expungement rules in New York can now tell those who have paid their dues to society for their criminal past can hold their heads up high and look towards a bright future. While New York will not expunge your criminal record regardless of the nature of your past offenses or crimes, commencing in October 2017, the New York State legislature has now given judges the ability, should they choose to exercise their legal right, to seal up to two prior criminal convictions. Yes, you read that right. In fact, not only can the court seal your criminal cases, but employers in most cases will even be forbidden to make inquiries about your sealed past.
Articles Posted in Criminal Defense
Sealing Your New York Criminal Conviction: NY Crim. Pro. Law 160.59 and Criminal Record Sealing
The old adage of “no news is good news” does not hold water when it comes to New York’s arcane and outdated criminal record expungement and sealing laws. Much to the frustration of many criminal defense attorneys who have witnessed firsthand good people getting caught up in the criminal justice system, the answer to a client’s request about the sealing and expungement of their criminal past was always the same (“was” being the relevant word). In fact, unlike many states, New York doesn’t expunge criminal records whether your conviction stemmed from a misdemeanor Third Degree Assault arrest as a twenty year old college student in Buffalo or White Plains or from a felony Fourth Degree Grand Larceny conviction you were shackled with after making an epic mistake charging $2,500 worth of personal items on the company credit card of your employer in Manhattan or Brooklyn. Whether you have long since paid for your drug crime or shown that you are an asset to society despite your conviction for a forgery related offense, New York legislators have been unsympathetic to your plight up until now. Fortunately, however, your future is about to change and drastically so.
NYC Administrative Code 19-190: Is New York City’s “Right of Way” and “Failure to Yield” Law Constitutional
New York City has good reason to enact laws to protect is residents, commuters and tourists. On any given day there are millions of people walking the streets and thousands of cars driving up and down the avenues. However, merely because the intent of the City Council is genuine does not mean that the laws it passes are constitutional, vague, legal or simply “OK.” An example of this is found in NYC Administrative Code 19-190. This “Right of Way” or “Failure to Yield” law has a great purpose, but its application and its legal foundation may have issues. At the time of this blog the Court of Appeals has not weighed in on the issues, but many New York City courts and judges, including those in Manhattan and Queens, have addresses what appears to be some glaring problems. While this blog entry by no means addresses the decision of the highest court in New York as no review has occurred, the following is recent decision from Queens County tied to the dismissal of AC 19-190.
If My Criminal Case Was Dismissed Can the Record be Expunged and Fingerprints Removed: Purging Your Arrest Record in NY
My case was dismissed in New York criminal court. Does that mean the record is expunged? I received an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal (ACD), is that also considered an actual dismissal? What happens to my criminal record? What about my fingerprints? Even though I was charged with a crime, how do I get my record wiped clean and my fingerprints out of the system and destroyed?
The above questions are all reasonable questions that are often asked to New York criminal lawyers, but not always answered in the most simple way. In fact, there are multiple answers to these questions and issues. Whether you were initially charged with and arrested for a felony Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, a misdemeanor Assault in the Third Degree, issued a Desk Appearance Ticket in Manhattan or you were indicted in Brooklyn, there really is no engagement in New York State. That’s correct. Other states may have a process to expunge criminal convictions, but New York is not one of them. There is, however, a means by which you – a person accused of a crime and later exonerated, found not guilty, acquitted or merely the rightful recipient of a dismissal – can clean up the records of your arrest including those related to fingerprints so that your personal and professional exposure of a criminal past does not exist.
Chancellor’s Regulation C-105: Teachers and Other DOE Employee Arrests in New York City
Whether you are a high school teacher, elementary school nurse, administrative staff or a paraprofessional, if you are employed by the New York City Department of Education (DOE) an arrest and prosecution raises numerous flags in both the criminal court and with the City of New York. Simply, any arrest – misdemeanor or felony, through a Desk Appearance Ticket (DAT) or being hauled before a judge in criminal court – involves numerous moving pieces that you must address to preserve your career. Certainly, any arrest for any person is compromising. A shoplifting arrest in Manhattan where you are given a DAT for PL 155.25 or PL 165.40, a cocaine or other drug possession charging PL 220.03 in Brooklyn or even a turnstile jump or failure to pay a cab resulting in an arrest for PL 165.15 in Queens may not seem to be the most serious crime in the spectrum of New York City prosecutions, but to a DOE teacher or other employee, the concerns are real. Again, any arrest is compromising, but even if there is a limited likelihood for incarceration and you are not charged with an Assault, Grand Larceny or DWI, there are steps you must take in addition to those you are pursuing before the criminal court where you and your criminal defense attorney are fighting the allegations. To start, you should examine and review Chancellor’s Regulation C-105 that dictates the policy and management for arrests involving DOE employees.
Resisting Arrest and Obstructing Governmental Administration Dismissed: Failure of NY PL 195.05 Leads to Dismissal of NY PL 205.30
Challenging the legal or facial sufficiency of a complaint against an accused is a common if not routine motion made by criminal defense lawyers. When a prosecutor proceeds on a complaint it becomes was is termed an information. The information must be legally sufficient to provide for the elements of the crime charged and notice to the accused. However, the evidence or allegations contained within the four corners of the document need not reach the “beyond a reasonable doubt” threshold. While the standard may be fairly low, a defendant who is wrongfully arrested without the bare level of evidence should not be forced into the criminal justice system whether he is from New York City, White Plains, or New York’s Southern Tier. Simply, it is critically important to examine any complaint or information to see whether or not there are grounds to make a challenge.
This particular blog entry will address a recent decision dismissing one count of Resisting Arrest pursuant to New York Penal Law 205.30 and one count of Second Degree Obstructing Governmental Administration pursuant to New York Penal Law 195.05.
Failure to Appear on a Misdemeanor Court Date: Bench Warrants and Bail Jumping
Most people know to listen to a judge. After all, he or she has the ability to change the trajectory of your life whether you are involved in a civil case or you have been arrested for any number of crimes outlined in the New York Penal Law. In the criminal context, when you miss your court date, an arraignment for a Desk Appearance Ticket, a scheduled compliance date, a calendar call for an update, or any other appearance on a misdemeanor or felony crime, the judge hearing your case will more than likely issue a bench warrant barring some corroborated reason why you could not be present. As your criminal defense lawyer will (and should have already) tell you, once the judge orders or issues a bench warrant the police are authorized to arrest you. Complicating matters, if you are outside the State of New York, you may be held without bail until a detective returns you on a “Governor’s Warrant.” Could you sit there for a week, two, more? Sadly, yes.
Outside of the simple fact that you do not want a warrant issued and the police looking to arrest you and return you to court, the consequences of skipping your court date don’t end with a warrant. In fact, depending on how long you are out and about and fail to return, prosecutors in the District Attorney’s Office can hit you with a brand new charge…Bail Jumping.
What Types of Statements on Their Face Are Sufficient Threats for the Purpose of Second Degree Aggravated Harassment, PL 240.30(1)(b)
Whether its in the context of a Domestic Violence case with a former partner or lover or a co-worker in Manhattan, Queens or Brooklyn, those nasty, threatening or plain ugly and uninvited texts, emails or phone calls may be more than a mere annoyance. In fact, depending on the conduct, you will be arrested, you will see a judge and you will need a New York criminal defense lawyer experienced in and knowledgable about Aggravated Harassment in the Second Degree, New York Penal Law 240.30. Let’s be very clear. Second Degree Aggravated Harassment is a serious crime. The NYPD will arrest you based on an allegation. If there is corroboration or you make an admission, things can go from bad to worse. A class “A” misdemeanor, NY PL 240.30, although unlikely, could land you in a jail for up to one year even if you receive a Desk Appearance Ticket. Because of the severity and seriousness PL 240.30, this blog entry will attempt to further explain what conduct rises to criminal activity.
Agriculture and Markets Law 353: Intent, Knowledge and Animal Abuse in New York State
Certain crimes, whether ultimately proven by prosecutors beyond a reasonable doubt or successfully defended by New York criminal defense attorneys before or during trial, have a significant stigma associated with them. Crimes involving children rank high on this list of offenses, but those involving animals are not that far behind. Nobody, from New York judges to the Assistant District Attorneys who prosecute cases, has much sympathy where the allegations of an arrest or indictment involve animals. New York City may be the “concrete jungle,” but preying on animals will likely leave you locked up and facing a judge for your alleged indiscretions – willful or not. While each crime is unique, one statute that prosecutors use in their arsenal and that criminal defense lawyers find them selves challenging is Agriculture and Markets Law 353. This “A” misdemeanor, punishable with a permanent record by up to one year in jail, makes it a crime to deprive any animal of necessary sustenance, food or dink, or neglect or refuse to furnish that animal with such sustenance or drink. This blog entry will deal with the crime of AML 353 and the analysis of AML 353 in the context of case in New York City Criminal Court.
Federal Computer Hacking (18 USC 1030) Is Not Always What It Seems: Client Gets Federal Misdemeanor and No Jail
Having the FBI knocking on your door at 6 in the morning can be the most frightening experience in your life. They enter, start searching through your most personal belongings, take your papers, records, phone and computers and leave. This is what happened to one of Saland Law’s recent clients (we’ll call him “Dave” – not his real name). He reached out to us a short time afterwards, when we put our experience and knowledge to work. After some initial investigation, we discovered that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York was investigating an international computer hacking ring and that they believed Dave was involved. They initially intended on charging Dave with the serious felony of Computer Hacking under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1030(a)(i), which carries a potential sentence of 10 years in federal prison.
After a diligent and thorough examination of the evidence and Dave’s background, it became clear that Dave was not an international computer hacker. Rather, Dave was a down on his luck twenty-something, who had a troubled past. Dave had a difficult upbringing, growing up in a violence-filled household, child welfare agents constantly around. Dave witnessed abuse of his mother by his father and his sister’s suicide attempt. Dave sunk into deep depression. He spent more and more time and energy on the computer, eventually suffering an addiction to computer gaming and usage. Dave hit rock bottom when he wandered onto a website that promoted computer hacking – it described how to do it, and sold software that enabled the hacking. In a weak moment, Dave purchased the software and began to use it to look at other’s computer files, including his girlfriends. Dave wasn’t proud of his conduct, but because of his addiction, he couldn’t help himself. Dave didn’t try to steal credit card information, or his victim’s identification. Rather, he was only falling deeper into his computer addiction. Continue reading