New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

December 4, 2017

Getting an Order of Protection and Fighting a Restraining Order in Westchester County Family Court

My former girlfriend won’t stop calling and harassing me. Can I get a Family Court order of protection? My ex-husband comes to my office and house without my permission. He is scaring me and I am afraid I will lose my job. Can I get a restraining order in Family Court or is my only choice to have him arrested? The short answer to these questions is if you live in Westchester County or the person harassing, threatening or stalking you resides or commits these or other violations of the New York Family Court act in White Plains, Yonkers, Somers, Bedford, Scarsdale, New Castle, Armonk, Yorktown, Bronxville or Irvington, to merely name a few Westchester towns and cities, you can file a petition in Family Court for an order of protection. While the process for the most part is the same whether you are requesting a restraining order in Rockland Family Court, Putnam County Family Court, NYC Family Court or Westchester County Family Court, any request for an order of protection starts in the Westchester County Family Court located in White Plains.

Whether you are a petitioner (complainant) or a respondent (defendant), you should understand the law and how it is applied in Family Court. Remember, while the criminal courts are obviously criminal, Family Court is a civil forum and pursuing your rights in court does not preclude you from doing the same in the other. Merely a brief explanation regarding process and procedure, this blog nonetheless is valuable to both petitioners and respondents with pending actions for restraining orders in Westchester County.

November 27, 2017

Damaging a Statute or Other Property in New York: Understanding Criminal Mischief and Criminal Tampering Crimes

by Jeremy Saland

During summer 2017, a New York man, David Hedeen, was arrested and charged with Criminal Mischief when he vandalized four statues outside of a church in SoHo. The case highlights how seriously New York State and her prosecutors deal with crimes of vandalism. Simply, no statue, or any property of another person, should ever be tampered with or destroyed.

Criminal Mischief charges in New York are separated into four different classifications. Reverend Mario Julian, who is the priest at the church, stated that the damage done equaled close to $10,000. If that turns out to be true, and as now reflected in the indictment, Hedeen faces charges of Second Degree Criminal Mischief. This charge, New York Penal Law 145.10, includes intent to, and actually causing damage that is greater than $1,500. If convicted, Hedeen could face up to seven years in prison on a class “D” felony.

November 22, 2017

New York Molly and MDMA Arrest for PL 220.31 Dismissed: Felony Charges for Criminally Selling Ecstasy Dropped

by Jeremy Saland

Whether you are at the Electric Zoo Festival on New York’s Randall Island, rolling with Phish at Manhattan’s Madison Square Garden, or you are merely out and about in New York City, Westchester County, Rockland County, or anywhere in the State, if you possess or sell MDMA, Molly or Ecstasy you potentially face an arrest for either a misdemeanor or felony crime. As your criminal lawyer will explain, mere possession of Ecstasy, even one pill, violates New York Penal Law 220.03, Seventh Degree Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance. Depending on the quantity in your possession and whether you have the subjective intent to sell the Ecstasy, you could also face felony crimes including Third Degree Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance, New York Penal Law 220.16. Complicating matters, when you actually sell Molly, MDMA or Ecstasy in New York, the crime you face is by default a felony. Assuming the weight of the controlled substance is less than one gram, meaning just one pill, then you would be charged with New York Penal Law 220.31, Fifth Degree Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance. If the weight of the Ecstasy, MDMA or Molly exceeds one gram, then the applicable arrest charge is New York Penal Law 220.39 assuming this sale did not occur on school grounds. This crime is Third Degree Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance. When the weights exceed those here and as outlined in the New York Penal Law, the criminal offenses for criminal possession or sale are significantly more serious.

Because of the above exposure, any arrest, whether by Desk Appearance Ticket or felony complaint, requires immediate and professional attention. Sometimes, investigation and advocacy from the onset of an arrest can provide tremendous benefits as the matter makes its way through the criminal justice system. Fortunately for three recent clients of Saland Law PC, despite their arrests for selling Molly to undercover police officers at the Electric Zoo, they took immediate action to retain a criminal lawyer and fight their respective arrests for PL 220.31 head on as they worked their way towards an ultimate dismissal on the merits.

November 17, 2017

Differentiating Aggravated Cruelty to Animals and Torturing Animals: NY AML 353-a[1][i] v. NY AML 353

by Jeremy Saland

Animal cruelty, whether in violation of a criminal statute or an otherwise intentional, callous and malicious act or acts, is simply horrendous. Whether one wears the hat of a District Attorney, criminal defense lawyer, judge or person who merely cares about the well-being of others living things, committing acts of violence and seeking to cause pain to animals is unconscionable. When you commit certain acts against animals, regardless of the size, age, or health of the same, your actions may be punishable as a crime pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law 353 or 353-a[1][i]. These crimes, “Overriding, Torturing and Injuring Animals” and “Aggravated Cruelty to Animals” respectively, are class “A” misdemeanors and “E” felonies. While the former is punishable by as much as one year in a county jail, the latter has a potential sentence of up to four years in prison.

The issue addressed by this blog is to briefly describe the two offenses and differentiate the crimes.

November 13, 2017

Indicted by New York Grand Jury for Multiple Fraud Felonies, Client Secures Misdemeanor and “Time Served”

by Jeremy Saland

On he heals of a misdemeanor disposition where our client was exposed to multiple felonies relating to fraud, the New York criminal lawyers at Saland Law PC are pleased to announce a similar disposition for a client charged with and facing, among other offenses, Third Degree Criminal Possession of Stolen Property, New York Penal Law 165.50 and multiple counts of Second Degree Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, New York Penal Law 170.25. Both offenses are class “D” felonies where a conviction exposed our client to as much as two and one third to seven years in a New York State prison.

November 4, 2017

The Differing Degrees of Criminal Diversion of Prescription Medication and Prescriptions: NY Penal Law Article 178

by Jeremy Saland

The prescription drug epidemic may not be as rampant as the crack and cocaine abuse in the 80s and 90s, but it is no less harmful and frightening. Whether a drug is Oxycodone, Xanax, Hydrocodone, Adderall or some other prescribed controlled substance or narcotic, the potential harm to the abuser, his or her family and the community-at-large is great. Because of this, law enforcement from the NYPD in New York City to smaller police departments, as well as the District Attorneys prosecuting crime in the associated jurisdiction, have sought to disrupt the illegal trade and sale of these drugs. That is where the crime of Criminal Diversion of Prescription Medication and Prescriptions, New York Penal Law Article 178, becomes part of law enforcement’s arsenal to combat the illegal sale, possession and trade of prescription drugs.

This blog entry will identify and address the differences between the varying degrees of Criminal Diversion of Prescription Medication – NY PL 178.10, NY PL 178.15, NY PL 178.20, NY PL 178.25 – and potential punishment associated with each crime.

November 1, 2017

Aggravated Harassment Arrests: Does a “Conditional Threat” Satisfy the “True Threat” Requirement of NY PL 240.30

by Jeremy Saland

While not always a domestic crime or family offense, arrests for Second Degree Aggravated Harassment in New York are fairly common in the marital, parent-child and intimate partner context. However, whether the partners have a sexual, physical or familial relationship is of no consequence. Business partners, friends and acquaintances can all run afoul of New York Penal Law 240.30. Simply, the relationship between the parties is fairly irrelevant.

If the nature of the relationship is irrelevant in a Second Degree Aggravated Harassment prosecution, what about how a threat is made? Does a clearly bogus threat violate the law irrespective of whomever the recipient may be? What about a joking threat? For that matter, what constitutes a “true threat?” This blog entry will not merely address this last question, but briefly examine whether a conditional threat is the same as a true threat for the purpose of PL 240.30.

October 27, 2017

Must a Firearm be Operable to Prove a Violation of Criminal Possession of a Weapon or Criminal Possession of a Firearm

by Jeremy Saland

Sometimes, if not routinely, a common sense or every day definition does not comport with those found in the New York Penal Law. Whether statutorily defined or established pursuant to legal precedent and decisions, what may seem clear to you may actually be quite different in a court of law. As your criminal lawyer can easily explain, in the eyes of the New York Penal Law, a loaded firearm does not require a bullet in the chamber, magazine, clip or, for that matter, physically in the gun at all. Instead, according to the law practiced in New York State criminal courts involving crimes such as Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, New York Penal Law 265.03, a loaded firearm is one that is capable of being loaded, for example, with bullets or ammunition in the same case. Despite what a layperson may think, the law treats these types of “loaded” pistols, revolvers, and other firearms the same. In fact, while a loaded firearm can violate PL 265.03, an unloaded firearm is a distinct crime of Criminal Possession of a Firearm, New York Penal Law 265.01-b(1), carrying a significantly lesser potential sentence upon conviction.

Keeping this common sense-criminal code dichotomy in mind, what about operability? Does it matter in the eyes of the criminal law – and the prosecuting District Attorney – whether your gun can fire or discharge a bullet? Simply, is operability a mandatory element of any firearm crime found in New York Penal Law Article 265?

October 24, 2017

Accused of Stealing Prescriptions and Forging Doctors Signature: Client Avoids Multiple Felonies and Pleads to One Class “B” Misdemeanor without Jail or Probation

by Jeremy Saland

Its very easy to assume the worst about people. Its equally easy to stand in judgement of someone you do not know. After all, if they have done something wrong they are guilty and should be punished accordingly. However, that is not the reality of the world. There is a sea of grey between the two islands of black and white. There are human factors, life experiences and even mental health issues that impact how we conduct ourselves. Sometimes, even the good do bad. It could be you. Your sibling. Your child.

October 20, 2017

Drug Possession Arrests in New York: Is a Lab Test Needed to Sustain a Charge of PL 220.03

by Jeremy Saland

The state of the New York Penal and Criminal Procedure laws as practiced in New York courts is overly restrictive and burdensome. What says you? According to whom? The state of the New York Penal Law and Criminal Procedure Law as practiced in New York courts is overly lenient and broad!

The beauty of asking two different people the same question, especially in New York, is that you will get two different answers. Irrespective of one’s personal view, any spectator or active participant in the criminal justice system will likely tell you that on any given day you can likely see both of these perspectives play out in courtrooms from New York City to Buffalo. Without addressing the validity of the above conclusions or what might happen from day to day, there is one area of law that, right or wrong, that is stacked against the accused. Merit and reasoning aside, law enforcement can charge you, the accused, with the most minimal amount of evidence and corroboration while prosecutors can draft a legally sufficient complaint or information charging you with a drug crime in New York such as Seventh Degree Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance, New York Penal Law 220.03, based on nominal evidence. How can law enforcement sustain a charge of PL 220.03 so easily you ask? Because if the police say you possessed drugs and explain their reasoning in boilerplate language as to why they believe it’s a controlled substance, then barring any other infirmities the information (complaint) against you is legally sufficient and will likely overcome a motion to dismiss.