Non-Violent Crimes

September 4, 2015

Endangering the Welfare of a Child: How Long is Too Long to Leave Your Child in an NY PL 260.10 Prosecution

To leave your child unattended or not. That is the question. Whether the child is three months, three years or thirteen years old, does it matter? If the child is left alone for five minutes, fifteen minutes or two hours, is it relevant? Does it make a difference if the child is left in a car, a home or public location? What if drugs, alcohol or dangerous instruments are nearby? While not specified in the Endangering The Welfare of a Child statute statute, New York Penal Law 260.10 is the crime that encapsulates these types of actions and behaviors involving and toward children. A serious crime, Endangering the Welfare of a Child is an “A” misdemeanor with a punishment that can be as great as one year in jail. Compounding matters, the Administration for Children Service (ACS) or Children Protective Services (CPS) may conduct their own investigation, the child could be removed from the home and a criminal court will likely issue an order of protection either limiting or preventing certain contact with your child.

Although each of the questions addressed above will not be reviewed in this particular blog entry as they have been discussed in numerous other entries found throughout the NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com (you can search this blog or follow the links), this entry will confront the issue of length of time a child is left unattended and when it rises to criminal conduct.

April 20, 2015

Intentionally Switching Medications for Profit: A Pharmacist’s Exposure to New York State Health Care Fraud Article 177 Felonies

by Jeremy Saland

Healthcare Fraud (a/k/a Health Care Fraud) is crime vigorously pursued by local District Attorney’s Office and the New York State Attorney General. The basic idea or theme behind any New York Penal Law Article 177 crime, investigation or arrest is that a defendant “with intent to defraud a health care plan… knowingly and willfully provided materially false information … for the purpose of requesting payment from a health plan for a health care item or service and, as a result of such information …, [the defendant] or another person received payment in an amount [to which the defendant or another person was] not entitled.” Depending on the nature or aggregate value of the payment received, Healthcare Fraud in New York State (it is irrelevant if alleged fraud occurs in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, White Plains, Yonkers or Albany) is either a misdemeanor or a felony offense. Once an individual is alleged to have received from a single health plan at least $3,000.00, the crime graduates to the class “E” felony of Health Care Fraud in the Fourth Degree. This crime is punishable by as much as four years in prison. Obviously, should the aggregate amount be greater, the felony and incarceration exposure increases significantly.

With this general understanding of New York’s Health Care Fraud statute, the following blog entry will provide a little more insight into what actions can be the basis of a criminal violation.
In People v. Khan, 18 NY 3d 535 (2012), the Court of Appeals grappled (that may be an overstatement) with the nature of proof required for a conviction under the Health Care Fraud statute. There, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and the New York City Human Resources Administrations conducted an undercover investigation of NYC Pharmacy, Inc. NYC Pharmacy Inc. is a pharmacy located in Upper Manhattan.

April 13, 2015

Endangering the Welfare of a Child: Can any Custodian be Liable for and Guilty of NY PL 260.10 or Must Prosecutors Establish Control and Care

by Jeremy Saland

In New York, or any state for that matter, arrests involving children carry with them the worst stigma. Obviously, crimes that involve sexual or physical harm are by far and away the most serious, but the stain of an arrest can linger even if your conduct is nowhere near or similar to these offenses. While on its face Endangering the Welfare of a Child, New York Penal Law 260.10, is a “nasty” crime, your conduct need not be that significant to run afoul of the law. In fact, the New York criminal lawyers and New York Endangering the Welfare of a Child attorneys at Saland Law PC have represented more than one client over the years for leaving a child alone briefly to merely follow through with an every day activity such as running into a store for a couple of minutes. Smart? Maybe not. Worthy of a criminal conviction? No.

Well, beyond the crime of PL 260.10, even if the conduct itself is criminal, who is responsible for the child in question? What if, for example, a child was left unattended and you, as a cousin, neighbor, uncle, sibling or other party came to secure the child after the police had been called. Is your mere offer to take responsibility of the child also a reflection of your culpability for leaving the child alone? What must prosecutors do to establish the nature and extent of the defendant’s control and care? A recent decision from the Bronx Criminal Court answers this exact question.

January 23, 2015

Charges Against New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver Explained — What is Honest Services Fraud?

by Peter Katz

It’s all over the newspaper today, with headlines like “BombShel” and “Silver Lining Crook Book,” that the long-time Speaker of the New York State Assembly, Sheldon Silver, has been hit with fraud and corruption charges by U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara. Everyone is talking about the accusations – Silver allegedly received millions of dollars over about a dozen years from two law firms for referrals in exchange for political favors. But what, exactly, is Silver charged with?

Silver has been charged with five counts in a criminal complaint. First, keep in mind that a criminal complaint is merely the beginning of a criminal prosecution in federal court. In order for the U.S. Attorney’s Office to pursue this case, they will have to present evidence before a grand jury, which would have to vote an indictment. Only then could the case proceed to trial. Many have said that the government could indict a ham sandwich – and in this case, given the details in the criminal complaint, appears to be a likely scenario.

One other possibility is that Silver could enter into a plea bargain with the U.S. Attorney’s Office and plead guilty to what is called an Information. It has the same legal power and effect as an indictment, but would not require the U.S. Attorney to present evidence to a grand jury. Only time will tell which way it will go. Continue reading

November 6, 2014

Does Failing to Allow Police in Your Apartment Without a Warrant or an Emergency Constitute Obstruction of Governmental Administration (PL 195.05)

by Jeremy Saland

Simply, we can all appreciate and respect the fact that just as the police act on calls, information and statements with the goal of providing safety and security to residents of New York, there are times when the police are not needed or warranted. Practically speaking, it is often difficult for law enforcement to ascertain whether their services and presence is truly necessary without further investigation. Many times it is essential for the police to get involved while other times it is not. An interesting question arises where the police come to your house and want to gain access. In such a circumstance, can you deny them entry and if you do deny them access, can you be prosecuted for a crime such as Obstructing Government Administration in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 195.05)? Addressing this exact circumstance (but remember each case is unique and the facts of the case dictate what law applies), People v. Holmes, 2014 NY Slip Op 51099 (NY Crim. Ct.) sheds some light on this issue.

January 15, 2014

NYC Prosecutors Vigorously Prosecute PL 250.45: Doctor Lucky to Avoid Reigstration on Conviction for Unlawful Surveillance

by Jeremy Saland

In the beginning years of his first term, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. initially followed much of the policy of his predecessor, Robert Morgenthau. Over time, Vance tweaked what he believed needed tweaking and completely changed what he believed needed changing. Some crimes were prosecuted more vigorously while others may have been held to a lesser standard or bar. Right or wrong, better or worse, if you are in Manhattan and you are accused of or arrested for certain crimes, be prepared to fight what may be the very firm hand of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. One such crime that was always prosecuted in a zealous manner, and still is today, is that of Unlawful Surveillance in the Second Degree, New York Penal Law 250.45. I have blogged about this crime and have drafted material about this offense on the New-York-Lawyers.org website because it is a crime that not only has direct consequences in terms of incarceration as a felony, but collateral penalties that could be career and life changing.

Pay very close attention. If nothing else, understand that if you are convicted of PL 250.45, Second Degree Unlawful Surveillance, you may be required register as a sex offender. What you may think was a harmless prank or something for your eyes only, is an offense that you may never walk away from. Registration as a sex offender would not only brand you a “pervert” in the eyes of friends, neighbor and colleagues when your registry information was disclosed, but your career could be derailed. Not to knock a guy while he is down and out, just ask a former Mount Sinai urologist who was sentenced earlier today. While many people likely supported him as an otherwise good person, skilled physician and asset to his community, he will likely be reeling from his Second Degree Unlawful Surveillance conviction for years to come. Even though this doctor was not required to register, he lost his position at Mt. Sinai Hospital.

December 7, 2013

New York Criminal Contempt Information Page: Understanding the Different Crimes of Criminal Contempt

by Jeremy Saland

Criminal Contempt is a crime that generally brings both personal attention and significant scrutiny from Assistant District Attorneys and judges beyond what one would normally expect in a criminal prosecution. Its not that other criminal cases aren’t thoroughly reviewed, but the personal and often domestic component to a Criminal Contempt case forces prosecutors to dig deeper into allegations, protect an alleged victim and even cover themselves should something happen at a later date and it is deemed that at the time of the initial incident, the Assistant District Attorney did not properly handle the case. For all of these reasons and the often very serious nature of a Criminal Contempt case, the crimes in New York of Criminal Contempt in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 215.50), Criminal Contempt in the First Degree (New York Penal Law 215.51) and Aggravated Criminal Contempt (New York Penal Law 215.52) are all “top shelf” crimes in the eyes of law enforcement and know less serious to defend in the hands of even the most experienced New York criminal lawyer.

Because of the varying degrees and crimes of Criminal Contempt, understanding your exposure should commit a Criminal Contempt crime is important. Second Degree Contempt, NY PL 215.50, is an “A” misdemeanor with a punishment that can be as great as one year in a local (county) jail. First Degree Contempt, NY PL 215.51, is an “E” felony punishable by as much as four years in prison. Aggravated Criminal Contempt, NY PL 215.52, is a “D” felony carrying a sentence of as long as seven years behind bars.

November 26, 2013

Is Proper Service Necessary in Order to Find a Later Violation of a Restraining Order: Understanding NY Second Degree Criminal Contempt

by Jeremy Saland

One of the more straightforward arrests and prosecutions handled by Assistant District Attorneys in New York City as well as some of the neighboring counties is Criminal Contempt in the Second Degree. Second Degree Criminal Contempt, pursuant to New York Penal Law 215.50(3), basically occurs or is committed when you violate the language of an order of protection or what is also referred to as a restraining order. For example, if a judge of the Criminal Court, Supreme Court, County Court (outside New York City) or Family Court issues an order of protection in favor of either a complainant or a petitioner, you (as a defendant or respondent) must abide by the language of that order. If that order of protection states on its face that there can be no contact what-so-ever and you call or stop by the other party’s apartment to say “hello” or apologize for past misconduct, you will violate the order. To be very clear, any contact beyond what is permitted, whether it be for kindness or crime, will be the basis for violating an order of protection.

Now that you have a general (yet non legal) idea as to what constitutes Criminal Contempt in the Second Degree, NY PL 215.50, the remaining substance of this blog entry will address People v. Jakubowski, 2013KN044821, NYLJ 1202627740970 (Crim., KI, Decided November, 12, 2013) where the issue was not necessarily what caused the violation of the order of protection, but what constituted a defendant’s knowledge of its existence in order to determine whether a violation occurred. In that case, the defendant was personally served with an order of protection by the victim/complainant in February. In June, the defendant “made eye contact with [the complainant], [gestured] with the [his] finger across [his] neck in a throat-slashing manner, and [took] photographs of [complainant]” – which was in violation of the order of protection. Subsequently, the police arrested the defendant and he was charged with Criminal Contempt in the 2nd Degree (Penal Law 215.50(3)) and Harassment in the 2nd Degree (Penal Law 240.26(1)). In response, the defendant made a motion to dismiss these charges.

November 21, 2013

Operation Finish Line: Queens Prosecutors Net Dozens of Defendants in Nationwide Trademark Counterfeiting Busts

by Jeremy Saland

What is likely being hailed as a major victory for law enforcement, Queens County District Attorney Richard Brown has announced the arrest of more than two dozen individuals involved in a Trademark Counterfeiting enterprise and the recovery of more than $500,000 in cash and fake goods with a street value of approximately $750,000. According to the Queens DA’s press release, the investigation that netted the haul of contraband and cash was dubbed “Operation Finish Line.” A three year investigation by prosecutors, Operation Finish Line netted the indictment of multiple crews as as well as businesses. These alleged organized crews imported imposter goods from China and distributed fake and fraudulent designer brands, including True Religion and Polo, throughout the United States. These rings generated approximately $10 million annually in their alleged counterfeit scheme.

While the individual and corporate defendants face a variety of crimes, many of the offenses are extremely serious that could result in as much as fifteen or twenty five years in prison. In fact, a dozen of those arrested in Queens face the charge of Enterprise Corruption (New York Penal Law 460.20). NY PL 460.20, is New York State’s version of the organized crime statute used by federal authorities to go after organizations such as the mob. Where there is a common goal, criminal scheme and ascertainable structure, prosecutors pursue this crime as the “hammer” in a criminal case for a very clear and obvious reason. It is certainly not missed by an experienced New York Criminal defense attorney who practices with regularity in criminal and supreme courts. Simply, if you are convicted of Enterprise Corruption as a person who has no prior brushes with the criminal justice system you will still face a minimum term of one to three years in state prison and as much as eight and one third to twenty five years.

November 4, 2013

Unlawful Surveillance – PL 250.45: From “Up Skirts” to Bathroom Recorders – Must All Defendants Register as Sex Offenders Upon Conviction

by Jeremy Saland

Every criminal arrest or conviction has a collateral consequence. Obviously, some are more severe than others. While an arrest can be humiliating, a conviction can strip us of many rights we take for granted, destroy our ability to continue in our career or set a chain of events into action that ultimately result in our deportation. One crime that often has these secondary consequences is the New York felony crime of Second Degree Unlawful Surveillance. Unlawful Surveillance in the Second Degree, New York Penal Law 250.45, is routinely viewed by prosecutors in an extremely different light than the accused (as noted by the intensity of these prosecutions). While a defendant may argue this was a crime of opportunity by an otherwise “good” person, a police officer, detective or Assistant District Attorney, is more likely to view this crime as a premeditated and malicious act. Yes, your criminal lawyer or Unlawful Surveillance defense attorney may seek to convince a prosecutor that the recording was one act, a prosecutor may counter that it was many acts. In fact, it is fairly common for prosecutors to execute search warrants on mobile phones and other recording devices. When or if they find evidence of the current arrest charge or past acts, its is equally common for prosecutors to stand firm with a felony charge.

Irrespective of the above arguments in an Unlawful Surveillance case by either your criminal lawyer or the prosecutor, avoiding a felony conviction is critical. Yes, a felony can land in prison, but long after your case is over, NY PL 250.45 has significant ramifications. New York State Correction Law § 168-a[2][e] establishes that a person convicted of subdivision two (2), three (3) or four (4) of New York Penal Law 250.45 is a “sex offender.” As such, if you are convicted, like a rapist or child molester, you must comply with the New York State Sex Offender Registration Act (“SORA”). While your level may not be as high as those individuals convicted of the crimes I just mentioned, to a certain extent, registration is registration. The level wont matter to your neighbors, employer, etc. You are deemed a sexual predator by society.