If what prosecutors claim is true, Actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin could have Razzy worthy roles starring next to Marlon Brown in a remake of 1989’s “How I Got into College.” The alleged easy way out amateurs who, with others, collectively paid millions of dollars to “assist” their genetic lottery winners’ successful college admission into such universities as USC, Yale, Stanford, Georgetown, Wake Forrest, Ramsey (well, not really), and others, relied on the good old power of the almighty dollar to perpetrate the nationwide college entrance scheme. In lieu of cheating the old-fashioned way, “Operation Varsity Blues,” the relatively unoriginal but cutely named federal bribery and cheating investigation, resulted in dozens of arrests involving paid off Division 1 coaches, photoshopped pictures of high schoolers playing sports when they were likely absorbed in selfie inspired “insta” posts, and some old school cheating on SATs and ACTs. A heck of a scheme if you don’t get caught, this entire criminal enterprise had nothing on the one-man professional test-taking operation and self-proclaimed “GMAT Hero” along with his larger band of [admission slot] thieves. Responsible for taking in excess of 500 GMAT, GRE and TOEFL exams (go ahead, Google “Lu Xu” and “GMAT”), his proficiency and skill was unparalleled even among his test-taking cohorts. Sorta’ a lesser known of the Uncanny Xmen of the college admissions underground.
Thanks to the passage of New York City Administrative Code 10-177*3, Unlawful Disclosure of an Intimate Image, victims of Revenge Porn and the unauthorized sharing of compromising images in New York City – Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx and Staten Island – now can protect themselves in a court of law. Not only are distributors of intimate images, videos, pictures and other recordings committing a crime, but you, as a victim, can also file a lawsuit to hold them financially accountable for, among other things, punitive damages. Simply, if an ex-boyfriend, former spouse, or even an affair, shares your intimate images that he or she may have lawfully had at some point but were not permitted to send out to friends, business associates or online, a NYC Revenge Porn lawyer can help you secure justice in every sense of the word. No longer will you have to shrug when you ask, “How can I protect myself as a victim of Revenge Porn?”
The overwhelming number of criminal cases in New York never reach the point of trial. Whether the arrest is in New York City or the Hudson Valley, as cases wind their respective way through the criminal justice system, the District Attorney, judges and criminal defense lawyers address issues ranging from the legality of the original search and the strength of evidence to sufficiency of complaints and mitigating factors. Those criminal cases that are not resolved by a plea, reduction of charges or dismissal ultimately find themselves before a judge or jury for trial. For a recent client of Crotty Saland PC’s criminal lawyers, our client found herself charged with Fourth Degree Criminal Mischief, New York Penal Law 145.00. The allegations stemmed from a fictitious claim by our client’s ex-husband and his current girlfriend, with whom he had an ongoing affair, that our client approached the girlfriend’s home and smashed a window in the center of a door.
Whether you reside in New York City, the Hudson Valley or any municipality from Manhattan to Buffalo, Rochester to White Plains, or Syracuse to Albany, you are not immune from predation by would be extorters, coercers, blackmailers, stalkers and harassers. While the New York Penal Law covers these criminal acts as both felonies and misdemeanors, as of the time of this blog entry there is no New York statewide statute covering what is often referred to as “Revenge Porn.” Fortunately, however, thanks to New York City Administrative Code 10-177*3, Unlawful Disclosure of an Intimate Image, there is recourse for victims of “Revenge Porn” crimes in New York City. In fact, not only can the person sharing your intimate and sexual images without your consent find him or herself charged with a misdemeanor crime (can you say “hello” Rikers Island?), but NYC Admin. Code 10-177*3 also provides for civil remedies such as those involving punitive damages, compensatory damages, attorneys fees and injunctive relief so that your harasser ceases sharing and distributing your naked, sexual or intimate images.
It may be on a non-violent crime, but an arrest for Criminal Mischief in New York can be either a misdemeanor or a felony. What should be of significant concern to anyone charged with a New York Penal Law Article 145 crime is how easily a Fourth Degree Criminal Mischief, New York Penal Law 145.00, can morph into a Third Degree Criminal Mischief, New York Penal Law 145.05.
What property or belongings of any significance exist in our lives these days that are worth less than $250. If your friend broke something that belongs to you in the course of an argument, is there anything worth less than $250 that would prompt you to call the police? A used iPhone 7 that is more than a year old runs around $400 on eBay. Moreover, is there anything of any importance that costs less than $250 to repair? What this means is that, in New York, almost anything a person intentionally breaks that doesn’t belong to them can result in a felony charge punishable by up to 4 years in state’s prison, even with no prior criminal record.
More than most crimes in New York, Endangering the Welfare of a Child, New York Penal Law 260.10, is a nebulous and vague charge that leaves a great deal of discretion and interpretation in the hands of the prosecutor and the judge. The most commonly invoked section of the Endangering statute in New York is the allegation that the accused person knowingly acted “in a manner likely to be injurious to the physical, mental or moral welfare of a child.” Not only is this standard difficult to pin down, but it is seemingly subject to the disparate and constantly changing landscape of cultural norms, even between different areas of New York State. Modern psychology leaves no doubt that aggressive and repeated arguments between parents in the presence of a young child can lead to long-lasting psychological trauma, but is a District Attorney going to prosecute two parents criminally for fighting a lot? What about a parent who keeps marijuana for personal use in a desk drawer of their home office? What is enough to rise to level of acts that are likely to harm a child psychologically or “morally?”
Tension between religious groups and ignorance about others’ religious beliefs can manifest its head in very ugly and illegal ways. Sometimes it is violence against individuals who share a different religion while other times the target of these attacks are the physical houses of worship – synagogues, churches, mosques, temples and other places for prayer. Regardless, New York State gives the police and District Attorneys the tools to protect people rightfully practicing their religion and their respective places for prayer. Whether punishable as misdemeanors or felonies, the following blog entry briefly identifies and discusses some of the chargeable offenses that one could face upon arrest for damaging or defacing a house of worship or obstructing those who seek to exercise their freedom of religion.
During summer 2017, a New York man, David Hedeen, was arrested and charged with Criminal Mischief when he vandalized four statues outside of a church in SoHo. The case highlights how seriously New York State and her prosecutors deal with crimes of vandalism. Simply, no statue, or any property of another person, should ever be tampered with or destroyed.
Criminal Mischief charges in New York are separated into four different classifications. Reverend Mario Julian, who is the priest at the church, stated that the damage done equaled close to $10,000. If that turns out to be true, and as now reflected in the indictment, Hedeen faces charges of Second Degree Criminal Mischief. This charge, New York Penal Law 145.10, includes intent to, and actually causing damage that is greater than $1,500. If convicted, Hedeen could face up to seven years in prison on a class “D” felony.
While not always a domestic crime or family offense, arrests for Second Degree Aggravated Harassment in New York are fairly common in the marital, parent-child and intimate partner context. However, whether the partners have a sexual, physical or familial relationship is of no consequence. Business partners, friends and acquaintances can all run afoul of New York Penal Law 240.30. Simply, the relationship between the parties is fairly irrelevant.
If the nature of the relationship is irrelevant in a Second Degree Aggravated Harassment prosecution, what about how a threat is made? Does a clearly bogus threat violate the law irrespective of whomever the recipient may be? What about a joking threat? For that matter, what constitutes a “true threat?” This blog entry will not merely address this last question, but briefly examine whether a conditional threat is the same as a true threat for the purpose of PL 240.30.
Although not exclusive to drug and marijuana crimes, otherwise fairly simple offenses such as Seventh Degree Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance, New York Penal Law 220.03, and Fifth Degree Criminal Possession of Marihuana, New York Penal Law 221.10, are often complicated when the police not only arrest a person for possessing heroin, molly, MDMA, adderall, oxy, cocaine, ecstasy, marijuana or any other drug, but also charge that person with an additional crime when he or she attempts to hide or dispose it before the police can get their respective hands on controlled substance. In these circumstances the NYPD or other local police department often charges the accused not only with the PL 220.03 or PL 221.10, for example, but also with either Tampering with Physical Evidence or Attempted Tampering with Physical Evidence, a class “E” felony and class “A” misdemeanor respectively. While the latter offense, New York Penal Law 215.40, is punishable by as much as four years in prison, an attempt to commit the same crime is “only” punishable by up to one year in jail.
Because both the police and prosecutors often charge a variation of PL 215.40 whether by Desk Appearance Ticket or Central Booking processing, a charge of Tampering with Physical Evidence is far from atypical. However, an arrest and charge does not automatically equate to proof beyond a reasonable doubt if at all. This blog entry will address the fairly common scenario where an accused merely throws to the ground, drops or discards the physical evidence in question and whether that rises to the level of either a completed or attempted Tampering with Physical Evidence crime.