New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

August 26, 2009

Assault in the Third Degree (New York PL 120.00) and Assault in the Second Degree (New York PL 120.05): Differences in the Crimes and Your Criminal Defense

The best criminal defense of an Assaultcase depends on many factors. Regardless of where you are in New York, your criminal defense attorney should always pursue numerous legal angles. Is the Assaultcomplaint/information against you legally sufficient? Has the complaint/information established a physical injury or substantial pain? Are there any witnesses or are there pictures or video of the incident? How has the evidence been preserved? Not an exhaustive list, the above questions are tremendously important ones that your criminal defense attorney needs to know when defending your Assault case.

It is also very important to understand as the accused the nuances between certain types or levels of Assault. For example, if you are charged with intentional Assault in the Third Degree pursuant to P.L. 120.00(1), but you were acting recklessly, then your actions may or may not satisfy the intentional element of the offense. Instead, a charge of P.L. 120.00(2) would be appropriate. In the latter form of Assault, the intentional requirement is replaced with a reckless element. Although the levels of the crime are the same, they are both misdemeanors, if your mental state was reckless as opposed to intentional, then P.L. 120.00(1) would not be the appropriate charge.

August 22, 2009

New York Health Care Fraud in the First Through Fifth Degrees & Your Criminal Defense: Article 177 of the NY Penal Law

by Jeremy Saland

The New York State Attorney General and local District Attorney’s Offices actively pursue fraud regardless of where it rears it’s head. The heath care industry is not immune to such investigations by law enforcement. While numerous different criminal charges may stem from the same transactions, the common theme for fraud involving health care are the misdemeanor and felony crimes of Health Care Fraud in the First (PL 177.25), Second (PL 177.20), Third (PL 177.15), Fourth (PL 177.10) and Fifth Degrees (PL 177.05). While you may have a statutorily recognized defense, the following are the legal definitions for these crimes and ones that you need to familiarize yourself with in the event you are charged with any degree of Health Care Fraud in New York:

PL 177.05 – Health Care Fraud in the Fifth Degree

August 20, 2009

Plaxico Burress Pleads Guilty to Attempted Possession of a Loaded Gun: Local Sports Hero to Receive Two Years in Prison at Sentencing

by Jeremy Saland

Plaxico Burress, the former All-Pro wide receiver for the New York Giants, pleaded guilty in Manhattan Supreme Court today to Attempted Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, pursuant to New York Penal Law 110/265.03. Although Burress had been facing a minimum of 3.5 years in state prison, prosecutors agreed to offer a lighter sentence of 2 years in state prison followed by 2 years of post-release supervision.

Despite Burress’ best efforts for “jury nullification,” a Grand Jury indicted him for an offense that did not require any intent to commit a crime. In other words, his mere possession of the loaded firearm outside his home or place of business without a permit would have landed him behind bars for up to 15 years. From a legal standpoint, although the minimum sentence on a plea was 3.5 years, by allowing Burress to plea to the attempted crime, as opposed to the actual completed crime, reduced the offense from a “C” violent felony to a “D” violent felony. Under New York law, a sentence of 2 years is a legal disposition for “D” violent crimes. Additionally, the term of post release supervision is mandatory regardless of which offense he pleaded to.

August 18, 2009

No Felony Conviction, No Jail and No Probation: NYC White Collar Criminal Defense Firm Gets Client Misdemeanor and Conditional Discharge for Alleged $25,000 Theft

by Jeremy Saland

Saland Law PC, a white collar criminal defense firm located in Manhattan, is pleased that we were able to assist another client in obtaining closure to a pending criminal case while preserving her liberty. Our client was charged with Grand Larceny in the 3rd Degree, pursuant to New York Penal Law 155.35, and faced up to seven years in prison for her alleged involvement in a “paper case.” Prosecutors claimed that our client made unauthorized purchases using company credit cards totaling approximately $25,000.00. After reviewing the documents associated with the alleged felony theft, we were able to work out a disposition with prosecutors that departed far from the original accusation. Although the negotiations took some time, our client ultimately pleaded to a misdemeanor and stayed out of jail. Moreover, there was no probation or community service associated with her plea. Considering the real possibility of a felony criminal record and a term of incarceration, our client could not have been happier with the results.

While Saland Law PC cannot guarantee any particular result and each case must be handled differently, our experience as both former Manhattan prosecutors under Robert Morgenthau and as New York criminal defense attorneys gives us the experience, knowledge and understanding of the criminal justice system to ascertain and implement the best plan of attack to preserve our client’s rights, integrity and freedom.

August 14, 2009

Aggravated Harassment in the Second Degree, New York Penal Law 240.30(1), Dismissed Due to Hearsay

by Jeremy Saland

Regardless of the particular misdemeanor you are accused of perpetrating, it is imperative that you obtain the assistance of knowledgeable counsel to guide you through the process, analyze the case and set forth particular defenses. While it may not be apparent to you, your best defense might be right in front of you. In the case of People v. Buchy, a Westchester County Village Justice found that he needed to look no further than the document right in front of him. Fortunately for Mr. Buchy, the information against the defendant contained hearsay and the court dismissed the complaint.

By way of background, Criminal Procedure Law section 100.40(1)(c) sets forth the requirement that an information (the written complaint against the accused) must contain “[n]on-hearsay allegations of the factual part of the information, and/or of any supporting depositions [to] establish, if true, every element of the offense charged and the defendant’s commission thereof.” In other words, if the facts are established with hearsay, the case must be dismissed.

August 13, 2009

Accomplice Liability (New York Penal Law 20.00) in Conjunction with Assault in the Third Degree (New York Penal Law 120.00)

by Jeremy Saland

Your buddy is waiting to be arraigned at 100 Centre Street in Manhattan for Assault in the Third Degree pursuant to New York Penal Law 120.00(1) for splitting someone’s lip with his fists. The worst part is you need an experienced criminal defense attorney as well. Why? Well, you are sitting right next to him. So, here is the question. How is it that he is the guy who threw the punches, but you were arrested as well? The answer is found in New York Penal Law section 20.00. As we like to call it…accomplice liability.

Under New York law, one is liable for the acts of another when:

August 8, 2009

New York Criminal Defense Attorney Jeremy Saland In the News Regarding Diane Schuler’s Alleged Drunk Driving Incident

by Jeremy Saland

Saland Law PC, a top New York criminal defense firm based in Manhattan, is pleased to announce that once again one of our criminal defense attorneys has been sought out for his perspective and expertise regarding a current legal matter. Over the past year, our criminal defense lawyers have been featured on the CBS Evening News, Sports Illustrated Online, New Jersey Times-Ledger, AM-NY, Vault.Com and Associated Press. Jeremy Saland, one of our criminal defense lawyers and a former Manhattan prosecutor, commented on the devastating and horribly sad incident involving Diane Schuler. Specifically, the Associated Press questioned why the family now challenges the medical examiner’s findings that Mrs. Schuler had a significant amount of alcohol and some drugs in her system. As most of the public is aware, Mrs. Schuler’s alleged drunk driving along New York’s Taconic State Parkway resulted in the death of her child, her nieces and three men in another vehicle. Mr. Saland explained that it was highly unlikely any criminal charges would be brought against Mrs. Schuler’s husband. Yet, it is likely that the family is challenging the findings by the medical examiner for two main reasons. The first may stem from their concerns that Mrs. Schuler’s estate and assets may be subject to damages on a civil suit in the event one is commenced. Although insurance may cover those damages, if the family can dispute the findings of the medical examiner and establish that the accident was the result of an unknown medical condition, for example, the family may be able to defend against a potential law suit. Moreover, the family also would like to clear their name and dispute the findings that Mrs. Schuler callously killed her daughter, nieces and three other men while driving drunk.

Regardless of the outcome, this incident is one of the saddest stories in recent history and a wake up call to anyone who would consider getting behind the wheel of a car while intoxicated.

August 8, 2009

NY Criminal Defense: The Differing Consequence of Selling Marijuna (NY Penal Law 221.40) and Other Controlled Substances (NY Penal Law 220.39 and 220.44)

by Jeremy Saland

NY Criminal defense attorneys are confronted regularly with the reality that possessing or selling “drugs” can mean vastly different things depending on the substance. The disparity between possessing and selling marijuana and controlled substances such as cocaine, crack and heroin is enormous even though the NYS legislature recently eased the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Clearly, and arguably correctly, the legislature has deemed Criminal Possession or Criminal Sale of Marijuana (“Marihuana” in the statute), pursuant to NY Penal Law sections 221.10 and 221.40, as less dangerous or harmful to public safety than Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance pursuant to NY Penal Law 220.39 and 220.44.

A great example of this disparity is illustrated in the following scenario. If you are arrested and a small bag of marijuana clearly for personal use is recovered from your pant pocket, you will like face the charge of Unlawful Possession of Marijuna. Baring the amount of marijuana exceeding twenty five grams, a charge of Unlawful Possession of Marijuana is a violation and not a crime. While it is possible to be sentenced up to fifteen days in jail, if it is your first offense you are eligible to receive a Marijuana ACD. If that is the disposition, then in one year the case would be dismissed and sealed assuming you did not get into any further trouble. In the alternative, even if you were convicted of the Unlawful Possession of Marijuana, you would not have a criminal record as a result.

August 5, 2009

New York Gambling Ring Busted – PerfectWager.Com Generates Over $13 Million in Under Two Years

by Jeremy Saland

Las Vegas is a lot of fun, but according to the Queens County District Attorney’s Office, what happens in Vegas, stays…out of Queens. According to the Queens District Attorney’s Office, thirteen men were arrested and indicted for charges relating to gambling including Enterprise Corruption, Promoting Gambling in the First Degree, Money Laundering in the Third Degree and Conspiracy in the Fifth Degree. If convicted of Enterprise Corruption, the defendants face up to twenty five years in prison.

According to the Queens DA’s Office, the 86 count indictment alleges that the defendants ran an offshore wire room in Costa Rica which was accessible through a toll free number as well as a website – www.perfectwager.com. Bets were placed as low as $200 and as high as $4,000 for a single game.

August 4, 2009

Heller and Burress and the Right to Possess a Firearm in New York…Oh My!

by Jeremy Saland

Now that the Manhattan Grand Jury has voted an indictment in the gun possession case against Plaxico Burress, Burress and his attorney only have a few ways for him to avoid any jail at all. While this is a highly unlikely scenario (like any New Orleans Saints team winning the Super Bowl), outside of “jury nullification,” some legal analysts and attorneys believe that another means for Burress to attack the Criminal Possession of a Weapon charge can be found in the United States Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. In that decision, the United States Supreme Court found that individuals had a constitutionally protected right based in the Second Amendment to possesses firearms even if a local DC ordinance implementing a ban on guns said otherwise. Sounds great for Burress, right? Well…not so fast.

The United States Supreme Court decision in Heller slapped down a particular ordinance in the District of Columbia that amounted to a ban on arms. As noted in a decision published today in People v. Kenneth Kirby, a Suffolk County District Court judge found that: