New York Criminal Lawyer Blog
Whether in Westchester, Manhattan, Brooklyn, or any borough of New York City or county in the state, District Attorneys prioritize Domestic Violence related arrests, and rightfully so. Similarly, Domestic Violence lawyers who represent individuals accused of these crimes equally prioritize these cases knowing that both the police and prosecutors aggressively pursue what they believe, right or wrong, is accountability on the part of their clients. When the crime is a felony, such as for First or Second Degree Strangulation or Assault, or one that involves any type of weapon, both the prosecution and the defense often find themselves in an “all hands on deck” situation, albeit on different sides of the criminal justice system.
With this in mind, Saland Law is pleased to share that a recent client accused of First Degree Assault after allegedly stabbing her then-boyfriend in the upper shoulder/chest area, was completely exonerated after finding herself in the crosshairs of a such a prosecution. Facing a five-year minimum prison term if convicted, Saland Law’s client was nonetheless rightfully unwilling to accept a plea offer to any crime. Through months of uncertainty as the case slowly moved through the court process, our client, the real victim, stood firm until prosecutors exonerated her by dismissing all the charges upon Saland Law’s application even before the case reached the speedy trial threshold.
The police arrested our client after her now ex-boyfriend claimed that during a dispute, she grabbed a knife from the kitchen and plunged it into his shoulder area. Prosecutors believed that she did this possibly out of frustration or anger towards the complainant during the heat of their argument. Despite the allegations, we contended, and vehemently so, that our client was in fact the victim of an aggressive and violent boyfriend who had been violent in the moment just as he had been physically abusive in the past. Though our client never sought to hurt nor assault her ex-boyfriend, she stabbed him in self-defense as he cornered her and grew increasingly menacing toward his much smaller girlfriend. Simply stated, either she was going to wait to be potentially overpowered and assaulted in some manner, or our client had no choice but to grab the knife next to her on the kitchen counter when she could no longer retreat.
Without going into the details of the case nor defense, the prosecution’s theory of First Degree Assault was that our client stabbed her then-boyfriend and did so intentionally along with the intent to cause a serious physical injury due to the depth and location of the puncture. Our defense was twofold: self-defense, aka, justification, should lead the District Attorney to a dismissal and, to a lesser extent, the nature of the injury was not as severe as prosecutors portrayed. Therefore, they could not satisfy the legal definition and element of “serious physical injury” to prove their charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
Addressing the secondary defense first for the purpose of this blog entry, prosecutors alleged that the injury inflicted by our client rose to a “serious physical injury” as defined by law. This is an injury that could cause death or caused some protected impairment of health. As such, our client violated Penal Law 120.10(1), First Degree Assault. While we certainly felt from a legal point of view that the nature of the injury was a less significant “physical injury” that only called “substantial pain” (a legal term) and warranted a lesser criminal charge, even if we were successful, we recognized that our client could still face Attempted Assault in the First Degree, Penal Law 110/120.10(1) or Second Degree Assault, Penal Law 120.05. Because convincing the District Attorney of this lower-level injury would be a hollow victory leaving our client exposed to these other offenses, we used this line of attack to demonstrate that prosecutors’ case was weak in totality and had holes on multiple fronts even if this particular defense was not a home run in and of itself.
The better and more complete strategy, and the one we advocated for more aggressively, was that of justification as a matter of law. In doing so, the first step in implementing this defense was to slow the process down to prevent prosecutors from rushing to the Grand Jury. At the same time, we served notice of our client’s intent to testify before that body if prosecutors proceeded. All of this provided Saland Law time to obtain corroboration of the complainant’s past abuse of our client and to help establish the self-defense and justification framework. Without any witnesses on either side, we leaned heavily on a prior injury sustained by our client where medical notes reflected slightly on what occurred at the time of this earlier incident. With this in hand, we argued that our client’s ex’s past abuse and his current conduct was consistent with our justification defense. After all, our client, a far smaller woman, could have very well found herself in the frightening position where she had to make a split decision to protect herself. This reasonable doubt, along with a practical and layperson examination of the evidence, should title the scales in favor of our client and away from her abuser’s narrative.
Ultimately, when it came to proceed with the charges and for prosecutors to either present the case to a Grand Jury or conduct a Felony Hearing, we steadfastly maintained our client would testify and refused any offer. Despite the “speedy trial clock” not yet ticking to its lawful end, prosecutors agreed to dismiss.
A harrowing experience and one where our client faced mandatory incarceration, a reasonable and strong legal and factual self-defense claim, a questionable complainant, our client’s willingness to testify in the Grand Jury and later at trial if needed, and Saland Law’s advocacy, all pushed this case to a just end and another to add to the list of Saland Law’s successful case results.
Founded by former Manhattan prosecutor Jeremy Saland, Saland Law represents clients accused of Domestic Violence and other offenses in the boroughs of New York, Westchester County, and other New York City suburban counties and municipalities.