New York City Administrative Code 19-190, generally defined as failing to exercise “due care” and violating the right of way of pedestrians and cyclists, is a relatively new statute drafted and passed by New York City. Not codified in the New York Penal Law, legislation drafted and passed by the State Legislature and New York State Governor, AC 19-190 is an unclassified misdemeanor. While a conviction can land a person in jail, aka, Rikers Island, it is generally not the sentence of imprisonment that is of grave concern, but the fact that a criminal administrative code violation is indelible. In other words, whether you are convicted of a New York State Tax crime, New York State Penal Law offense or New York City Administrative Code misdemeanor, you will have a permanent criminal record. This blog entry will address some of the legal issues that have arisen since the enactment of AC 19-190.

Continue reading

Unlike DWI arrests in New York where you refuse to “blow,” there are other DWI or DUI crimes that are based on evidence of a person having a BAC of .08 or more. These drunk driving crimes are codified in New York Vehicle and Traffic Law 1192.2. While VTL 1192.2 is the same misdemeanor offense as a Common Law or Refusal DWI of VTL 1192.3, they are also different. These former DUI crimes are not based on whether you were staggering, unsteady on your feet and had slurred speech, but simply on whether your BAC was equal to or exceeded .08 even if you did not exhibit any of the indicia of intoxication. This blog entry addresses the conviction sealing eligibility issues found in New York Criminal Procedure Law 160.59 as it relates to a VTL 1192.2 arrest and conviction. Further, this article briefly examines whether you can seal a DWI conviction and, if so, how you file an application to seal your DWI.

Continue reading

I called my ex-girlfriend dozens of times and was ultimately convicted of Second Degree Aggravated Harassment. There was an order of protection issued, but I completed my anger management without any problems. Can I now get my criminal record cleaned and erased? Can I purge or seal a conviction for New York Penal Law 240.30? Does it matter I was incarcerated for three months and then had to complete three years probation?

With the passage and implementation of New York Criminal Procedure Law 160.59, “Sealing of Certain Convictions,” what was once an irrevocable and permanent blemish on one’s criminal record may no longer be the case. Instead of answering “yes” when an employer inquires about a criminal record, should you successfully seal an eligible conviction, New York Executive Law 296(16) precludes most potential employers from asking about your sealed criminal conviction or mandating that you divulge any information about the same.

Continue reading

A routine question by students at Columbia University is what is the university’s gender-based misconduct policy and how does it relate to Title IX? A very broad question involving many answers, the first step in understanding Columbia University’s gender-based misconduct policy and procedures for students, whether one is enrolled at Columbia, Barnard College or Teachers College, is to first identify what constitutes prohibited conduct.

Continue reading

A crime that is routinely prosecuted in New York City, and likely elsewhere through the State of New York, is New York Penal Law 265.01(1), Fourth Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon. More specifically, if you knowingly possess a gravity knife or a switchblade knife you are guilty of a class “A” misdemeanor. Because of the severity of the crime, its creation of a permanent criminal record as a result of a conviction, and the fact that what the State identifies as a gravity knife often results in regular people being charged with crimes they had no idea they violated, there are many offenders who should consider having their old criminal conviction for PL 265.01 sealed in accordance with New York Criminal Procedure Law 160.59. For that matter, whether you had metal knuckles, a slingshot, shirken, chucka stick or any other per se weapon, conviction sealing is an option to consider.

One of the problems with PL 265.01, and reason why it is an offense that you should seek to seal from your criminal record, is that on  its face a conviction for any weapon offense has the worst possible connotation for and to a prospective employer. While one might argue a switchblade knife is often associated with a dangerous instrument, a gravity knife can be something as simple as a multi-tool purchased at a hardware store. While this blog does not address the merits of the law, the questions posed here are can you apply to have your conviction for NY PL 265.01 sealed with the passage of CPL 160.59 and is Fourth Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon an eligible offense?

Continue reading

New York State has numerous laws and crimes regulating the use and possession of firearms and other weapons. Whether one is supportive of these statutes such as the Safe Act or not, these laws are some of the most rigid and strict in the nation. While they are all codified in New York Penal Law Article 265, the crimes vary from class “A” misdemeanors to class “B” felonies. There is little dispute that the most common of these offenses is Fourth Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon, New York Penal Law 265.01(1). However, the types of per se objects that qualify as weapons, including gravity and switchblade knives, may be serious, but not as significant as their firearm related brethren. Of these crimes, those likely prosecuted the most in New York City and at both LaGuardia and JFK Airport in Queens are Second Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon, New York Penal Law 265.03, and Criminal Possession of a Firearm, New York Penal Law 265.01-b. With that in mind, this blog entry addresses some of the most significant differences between two crimes that are somewhat similar and regularly prosecuted, but drastically different in their potential sentence and punishment upon a conviction.

Continue reading

In the State of New York, a DWI arrest and conviction can be based on different theories of the law. One such DUI or drunk driving crime is found in New York Vehicle and Traffic Law 1192.3. Often referred to as either Common Law DWI or Refusal DWI, this Driving While Intoxicated crime is based not on a “blow” of .08 or higher, but merely on a police officer’s experience and observations of, for example, a flushed face, watery-bloodshot eyes and the smell of alcohol on your breath. No, this blog entry does not address the legality of a refusal to provide a breath sample or the legal sufficiency of a DWI complaint charging VTL 1192, but a set of question asked by countless individuals convicted of DWI in New York: Can I seal my criminal conviction for a Common Law or Refusal DWI or DUI and, if so, how do I seal and remove the DWI arrest from my rap sheet or criminal record?

Continue reading

People often ask how as a former prosecutor I can now defend people who committed crimes or are guilty of criminal conduct. While I do have the advantage of representing whomever I choose and sending a client to seek a criminal lawyer elsewhere, there are few things in life that are so black and white. Simply, even good, honest and kind people make mistakes that are criminal. Otherwise hardworking people make poor decisions at a moment in their lives that are clearly wrong, but not indicative of the person they are or can become. For that matter, and arguably of greatest import, a criminal defense attorney should not be the first person to tell you that an accusation is nothing more than an accusation. Whether exaggerated or simply untrue, history proves that we all have a presumption of innocence for a reason that prosecutors must overcome by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Fortunately for an army veteran who served our country in combat overseas, Crotty Saland PC poked enough holes and mitigated enough alleged conduct to knock down an arrest for Third Degree Grand Larceny, New York Penal Law 155.35, to a Disorderly Conduct non-criminal violation.

Continue reading

Although Title IX and its affiliated policies and procedures governs sexual misconduct and relationship violence related to college and university campuses, it is critical to recognize that an action commenced under Title IX is separate from the criminal justice system. Yes, crimes or harassment, for example, committed at Columbia University, New York University, Pace University, CUNY, Fordham University or any institution can also lead to an arrest and prosecution in Criminal Court as well as a petition for an order of protection in Family Court, each respective university will conduct its own investigation outside of these bodies. Parallel or not, upon completing their due diligence and following the Title IX investigation process, a decision will be rendered, a potential hearing held to ascertain what, if any violation, occurred and the appropriate punishment will be handed down.

This Title IX blog entry will provide a basic understanding of Title IX as it relates to sexual misconduct and relationship violence in the collegiate realm. Significantly more information with greater detail is available on Crotty Saland PC’s Title IX information page.

Continue reading

Not every criminal lawyer in New York is an Extortion lawyer or Blackmail attorney. You can be well versed in the New York Penal Law, but not be familiar or have experience with the numerous subsections and theories of a Grand Larceny Extortion case. Fortunately for a Crotty Saland PC client, knowledge, experience and advocacy paid off in what on its face appeared to be a clear-cut violation of New York Penal Law 155.30(6) and other crimes.

After a night of consuming alcohol, our client was alleged to have demanded thousands of dollar from a fellow reveler encountered the night before. More than a mere inconsequential meeting, our client woke in the bed of this man having no recollection of coming home with him. Upon learning that the two had intercourse, our client became extremely alarmed and insisted any sex was without consent. While it was likely indisputable that our client lacked the ability to consent, our client allegedly made a grave mistake and demanded multiple thousands of dollars from the man or our client would report the crime to the NYPD. Ultimately cutting our client a check, our client left and only reported the incident after the check did not clear. At the same time, the man filed a complaint for Extortion.