New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

June 1, 2009

“Miranda Warnings,” Your Right to Remain Silent and Your NY Criminal Defense

Whether you are under investigation for a white collar crime or have already been arrested for a weapon crime, it is imperative to retain an experienced New York criminal defense attorney before you talk with law enforcement. It may be that without an admission or statement on your part to the police or FBI, law enforcement has no case against you…that is right…nothing. Whatever the circumstances, whether you voluntarily go to a precinct to talk to the police to “clear the air” or you are already under arrest, you may be waiving your rights and jeopardizing your case. Even more importantly, your fatal mistake may cost you your freedom. Unfortunately for one particular defendant in Nassau County, he learned this lesson the hard way.

In a decision rendered on May 8, 2009, a Nassau County District Court Judge ruled in People v. Alfredo Pena, 2008NA011705, that a defendant’s statements were not the result of a “custodial interrogation” and therefore admissible and not obtained in violation of his rights. This “custodial interrogation” is the key element or principle in New York’s cases involving Miranda and admissions. In the Pena case, the police were investigating the defendant for the crime of Harassment through phone calls. The defendant went to the station voluntarily, waited for about 45 minutes until the detective was available and ultimately made admissions of his involvement. During this entire period of time the defendant was never handcuffed or forced to remain in the precinct. Moreover, no threats or promises were made and the defendant was not arrested. Shortly thereafter, the defendant was read his Miranda warnings, which he voluntarily waived, and he spoke further with the police. Ultimately, as you have probably guessed by now, the police arrested the defendant and the prosecutors indicated that they were going to use all the admissions against the defendant at trial. After motions were made by the defendant’s counsel, a Huntley Hearing (a hearing where a judge determines the admissibility of a defendant’s statement) was ordered and conducted.

May 28, 2009

Animal Abuse in NY: Failure to Obtain Medical Treatment for Pet May Violate Agriculture and Market Law Section 353 (A.M.L. ､353)

by Jeremy Saland

Although not a commonly seen charge by criminal defense attorneys in New York City, the former Manhattan prosecutors at Saland Law PC know that violations of Agriculture and Market Law Section 353 (A.M.L. ､353) are far from atypical. A.M.L. ､353 provides, in relevant part:

“A person who overdrives, overloads, tortures or cruelly beats or unjustifiably injures, maims, mutilates or kills any animal, whether wild or tame, and whether belonging to himself or to another, or deprives any animal of necessary sustenance, food or drink, or neglects or refuses to furnish it such sustenance or drink, or causes, procures or permits any animal to be overdriven, overloaded, tortured, cruelly beaten, or unjustifiably injured, maimed, mutilated or killed, or to be deprived of necessary food or drink, or who willfully sets on foot, instigates, engages in, or in any way furthers any act of cruelty to any animal, or any act tending to produce such cruelty, is guilty of a class A misdemeanor.”

May 27, 2009

UPDATE: Identity Theft and Check Fraud Ring May Get Bounced into Jail: Hundreds of Victims in Criminal Scheme

by Jeremy Saland

As a follow up to my earlier post, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has announced a 227 count indictment of 18 individuals in an identity theft and check fraud scheme. As I correctly noted in the original post, these defendants are alleged to have perpetrated a scheme involving the crimes of Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, Identity Theft, Conspiracy, Unlawful Possession of Personal Identification Information and Scheme to Defraud. As a former Manhattan prosecutor who was one of the first assigned to the Identity Theft Unit upon its creation, I know the Identity Theft Unit will vigorously and thoroughly prosecute the alleged offenders. Depending on the individual and their applicable charges, the defendants face up to 25 years in state prison.

The defendants include:

May 27, 2009

Counterfeit Check Ring Bounced: Manhattan DA to Announce Eighteen Indictments in 4 Million Dollar Fraud Scheme

by Jeremy Saland

The white collar criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Saland Law PC have learned that the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office will announce the indictment today of 18 people, including accused ring leader James Malloy, in an alleged counterfeit check fraud scheme that utilized forged NYPD checks to perpetrate a multi-million dollar theft.

According to media reports, up to 40 people may have been arrested. It is alleged that the scheme operated by having an individual deposit a forged check into a bogus account. A teller, who was in on the scheme, allegedly provided the fraudsters with accurate account and check information to enable the fraudsters to create the fake checks and deposit them. In all, it is alleged that hundreds of checks were drawn off the accounts of about 20 companies.

May 24, 2009

NY Criminal Defense and Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) in NYC

by Jeremy Saland

With Memorial Day Weekend upon us, many people unfortunately make the mistake of drinking and driving in New York State and NYC. As a NY criminal defense attorney and former Manhattan prosecutor at Saland Law PC, I have defended and prosecuted individuals charged with Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). I can tell you that law enforcement and the courts vigorously prosecute DWIs regardless of whether it is your first time. Make no mistake, a DWI is a very serious crime that can have horrific results and that fact is not lost on prosecutors or the courts. That being said, no matter what crime you are accused of, even DWI, the police must still act within the confines of the law. Your rights should not and cannot be violated no matter the circumstances.

In the May 8, 2009 Queens Criminal Court decision of People v. Steven H. Noreiga, 2008QN001052, a NY criminal defense lawyer did his best to protect his client’s rights after he was arrested and charged with DWI. In that matter, the defendant made an illegal u-turn. Upon stopping the defendant, the officer noticed the strong odor of alcohol on the defendant’s breath. Shortly thereafter, the defendant was asked to take a breathalyzer at the scene where he “blew” a .188. The police officer then drove the car and parked it near the precinct while the passengers who were in the vehicle went there as well. A while later, and after determining that the defendant was not the owner of the vehicle, the officer went to secure the vehicle. At that point he noticed six 12 ounce bottles of Corona beer. Four of these bottles were opened with varying amounts of alcohol inside. During motion practice, the defendant’s attorney challenged the probable cause to arrest the defendant, the breathalyzer result at the precinct, as well as the recovery of the bottles of beer.

May 23, 2009

Entrapment: NY Criminal Defense – Inducement and Encouragement by a Public Servant

by Jeremy Saland

Whether you are accused of a “street crime” in New York such as Assault or Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance (selling drugs) or, in the alternative, you are accused of a White Collar crime such as Money Laundering or Grand Larceny, there are certain defenses specifically outlined in the Penal Law that you need to review with an experienced criminal defense attorney such as the former Manhattan prosecutors at Saland Law PC. One of those “affirmative” defenses is Entrapment.

According to Penal Law Section 40.05 – Entrapment – “it is an affirmative defense that the defendant engaged in the proscribed conduct because he was induced or encouraged to do so by a public servant, or by a person acting in cooperation with a public servant, seeking to obtain evidence against him for purpose of criminal prosecution, and when the methods used to obtain such evidence were such as to create a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by a person not otherwise disposed to commit it. Inducement or encouragement to commit an offense means active inducement or encouragement. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.”

May 20, 2009

CraigsList Escort Ring Indictment: “Room Service Entertainment” Nailed for Enterprise Corruption and Prostitution Related Crimes

by Jeremy Saland

From Andrew Cuomo to Robert Morgenthau, state and local prosecutors continue to vigorously prosecute crimes relating to Prostitution, Permitting Prostitution, and Promoting Prostitution. NY criminal defense attorneys experienced in these crimes, such as the criminal defense lawyers and former prosecutors at Saland Law PC, know that these offenses are only the tip of the iceburg. More significant crimes of Enterprise Corruption and Money Laundering lurk behind every corner where crews and organizations run these large scale escort enterprises. Case in point…the unsealed indictment in Queens County against seven alleged co-conspirators who ran “Room Service Entertainment.”

The 47 Count indictment unsealed today against Scott “Sal” Rosenberg, 45; Patricia “Nikki” Krupa, 32; Josef Davenport, 31; Joanna “Anna” Mercado, 24; Sylvia “Jamie” Soto, 29; Lina “Tina” Vazquez; and Barbara “Lisa” Morris, 48, accuses each of the individuals with Enterprise Corruption and related crimes. Enterprise Corruption requires that an organization have an “ascertainable structure” and is punishable by up to 25 years in state prison. Both Rosenberg and Davenport are alleged to be the mind and money behind the operation and ran the crew.

May 20, 2009

White Collar Defense Update: Eleven Stockbrokers, Three Traders and Two Principal Owners of Joseph Stevens & Company, Inc. Indicted for Fraud

by Jeremy Saland

As a follow up to an earlier post, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has announced that 17 individuals who worked at a now defunct securities firm have been indicted by a New York County Grand Jury for allegedly operating a racketeering scheme that scammed over six million dollars in unlawful commissions. The Manhattan Grand Jury indicted the defendants on the charges of Enterprise Corruption, Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of Stolen Property, Securities Fraud and Falsifying Business Records. As a former Manhattan prosecutor who has supervised prosecutions of numerous multi-million dollar fraud schemes including a two million dollar “pump and dump” scheme with the Securities and Exchange Commission as well as a NY white collar criminal defense attorney who has represented individuals accused of multi-million dollar fraud crimes, I can say with confidence that these defendants and their criminal defense attorneys have a long road ahead of them.

The The Grand Jury indicted 17 defendants. Among them are Joseph Stevens & Company, Inc., Joseph Sorbara, Steven Mrakowiz, Craig Shapiro, John, Moraitis, Massimo Martinucci, Peter Orthos, Alan Ferraro, Charles Raspa, Scott Tierney, John Micciola, Steven Scarcella, Michael Tripodi, Douglas Costabile, James Rathgeber, Matthew Menies and Haradjin Mucovic. Because each of the defendants are charged with the top count crime of Enterprise Corruption, they all face a minimum of one to three years if convicted and a maximum of eight and one third to twenty five years in prison.

May 20, 2009

Manhattan DA Robert Morgenthau to Announce 17 Defendant Indictment: Fraud Investigation Nets Securities Specialists and Brokers

by Jeremy Saland

According to published reports, 17 brokers and securities specialists are to be arraigned today in Manhattan Supreme Court after a Grand Jury indicted each of them in a scheme defrauding hundreds of investors out of over $150 million dollars. As a NY white collar defense attorney who has represented defendants charged with multi-million dollar fraud schemes and as a former Manhattan prosecutor who supervised the prosecution of a “pump and dump” involving over two million dollars in theft, I know first hand how the assistant district attorneys likely investigated this case and will prosecute the alleged offenders. At a minimum, those defendants who are charged with the actual theft or acting in concert to perpetrate a Grand Larceny in an amount of one million dollars or more will be facing one to three years in prison, but as much as eight and one third to twenty five years. However these defendant’s decide to proceed, they better act quickly or it has the potential to get significantly worse.

As I receive more information I will share it with you. Check back for an update.

May 18, 2009

NY Trespass Dimsmissed – Court Agrees with Criminal Defense Attorney – Complaint Facially Insufficient

by Jeremy Saland

A New York City criminal defense lawyer has successfully argued in Brooklyn Criminal Court that the pending Trespass charges, pursuant to Penal Law ､140.15, ､140.10(a) and ､140.05, against his client should be dismissed for facial insufficiency. The Brooklyn Criminal Court decision in People v. Darrell Weatherspoon, 2008KN076633, was published last week. For those readers who do not have access to this material, the New York criminal defense attorneys at Saland Law PC, will summarize this important legal decision for you.

By way of background, a person is guilty of Criminal Trespass in the Second Degree pursuant to PL ､140.15 when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling. A person is guilty of Criminal Trespass in the Third Degree pursuant to PL ､140.10(a) when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building upon real property which is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders. Lastly, a person is guilty of Trespass, a violation pursuant to Penal Law ､140.05, when he knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises. A person enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises when he is not licensed or privileged to do so.