New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

February 2, 2011

Manhattan DA: “S3” Identity Theft Crew Uses Others’ Identity to Fraudulently Purchase and Fence Apple Merchandise

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. announced earlier today that his office’s Cybercrime and Identity Theft Bureau has taken down and arrested a 27 person Identity Theft ring based out of Brooklyn, New York. Prosecutors allege that “S3,” as the crew calls themselves, “compromised hundreds of bank accounts,and fraudulently purchased Apple products from stores around the country to resell for profit.”

It is claimed that these Identity Theft bandits obtained personal identifying information of their victims by purchasing this information online through people who trafficked the data. Once the alleged fraudsters obtained the information, including credit card numbers, the leaders recruited individuals who would shop in stores with the credit card numbers. The shoppers duped Apple employees after ring leaders allegedly created fraudulent and counterfeit credit cards and placed the stolen credit card number onto the magnetic strip of the counterfeit credit card. Armed with a counterfeit credit card in the name of a shopper, these hired guns allegedly made the Apple purchases for items including iPads and MacBooks.

January 29, 2011

First Arrest for Drug Possession in New York: Potential Scenarios & Collateral Consequences for NY PL 220.03 Arrests & Desk Appearance Tickets

by Jeremy Saland

While no two cases are the same, the New York criminal lawyers at Saland Law PC have extensive experience representing those accused of Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Seventh Degree (New York Penal Law 220.03). In fact, the founding partners at Saland Law PC have experience on both sides of the law. Prior to starting the firm, both of our founding New York criminal defense lawyers served as Assistant District Attorney’s in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office where they prosecuted individuals for misdemeanor and felony drug possession and sale.

Whether you are arrested for possessing cocaine, heroin, crack, oxycodone or a “designer drug,” often times the police will issue a New York Desk Appearance Ticket to first time offenders charging them with NY PL 220.03. An “A” misdemeanor, this offense is punishable by up to one year in jail. In the event you are arrested and given a Desk Appearance Ticket in Manhattan for possessing a controlled substance, you will be required to appear at either 100 Centre Street or Midtown Community Court at 314 West 54th Street. Regardless, the charges are the same as if you had been arrested and held overnight to see a judge. Do not be under the impression that a Desk Appearance Ticket for possessing a controlled substance (NY PL 220.03) is not a serious matter. If you do not appear in court as required, a bench warrant will likely be issued for your arrest.

January 25, 2011

Tampering With a Witness – NY Penal Law 215.10 Through NY Penal Law 215.13: New York Criminal Law & Defense Information Page

by Jeremy Saland

Tampering with a Witness, a crime in New York State punishable by as “little” as up to one year in jail and as much as up to twenty five years in state prison, is an offense the prosecutors and the courts take extremely seriously. From New York criminal lawyers to prosecutors, all parties recognize the importance of protecting witnesses whether it be for the defense or law enforcement.

Because of the significance of the crime of Tampering with a Witness, the New York criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Saland Law PC have taken the time to create an educational Tampering with a Witness information page. The Tampering with a Witness legal page can assist you in understanding the degrees of the crime while also giving you a jumping point to start the in depth consultation that you will ultimately have with the attorney you determine will represent you. Again, while it is not an “advice” page, the Tampering with a Witness criminal law information page will give you the tools to take the next step in the event you are investigated, arrested or indicted for this crime.

January 21, 2011

New York Robbery in the First Degree: What Constitutes “Displaying” a Firearm or Gun Under New York Criminal Law

by Jeremy Saland

Robbery in the First Degree is one of the most serious and violent crimes in the New York Penal Law handled by both prosecutors and New York criminal lawyers. In fact, if you threaten the use of force to take property and you possess a firearm or gun, then your crime is a “B” felony punishable by a minimum of five years in state prison and a maximum of twenty five years for a first time offender. It is important to note that to be convicted of this crime you need not actually possess this firearm. Instead, you need only to “display[] what appears to be…a firearm” to be convicted of New York Penal Law 160.15(4). This entry will address a recent New York State First Department Appellate Division decision addressing what actions constitute and are sufficient to establish “display[ing] what appears to be…a firearm.”

In People v. Douglas Welsh, indictment number 2963/2008, the defendant was convicted after testimony from a restaurant employee that the defendant entered the premises and demanded money from the cash register or he would shoot the employee in the face. Further testimony revealed that the defendant collected money and gestured with one hand while the other hand was bent at the elbow and stayed in the same position as if something (a gun) was being held waist level. Moreover, the employee could not see that hand at waist level because it was behind the counter. After trial, the defendant was convicted of Robbery in the First Degree under the subsection above for displaying what appeared to be a firearm. The defendant appealed from that conviction arguing that the evidence was not sufficient to establish that he displayed what appeared to be a firearm.

January 19, 2011

DA: Staten Island Office Assistant Arrested For Medical Prescription Fraud Involving Nearly 3500 Oxycodone Pills

by Jeremy Saland

According to the Staten Island District Attorney’s Office, Kami Purvis, an employee at a physician’s office, was arrested after an alleged prescription drug scheme that spanned 19 months. District Attorney Daniel Donovan claims that not only did the crime span well over a year and a half, but it is believed that as a result of prescription pad thefts, Ms. Purvis managed to obtain nearly 3500 pills of oxycodone in varying dosages.

Not only is it alleged that Ms. Purvis stole the prescription pads and forged the actual prescriptions, reports further allege that she submitted the prescriptions to one particular pharmacy 35 times. Compounding matters, it is claimed that she used her own state Medicaid card to purchase the pills in many of the transactions. If the allegations of past fraudulent transactions were not enough, reports indicate that upon Ms. Purvis’ arrest, the police recovered 15 prescription sheets including three that were filled out fraudulently. If reports are true, Ms. Purvis voluntarily submitted to a drug test where she came back with negative results. If nothing else, this will certainly hamper a potential defense that she abused the drugs as opposed to profited from them. Ms. Purvis should have requested council before agreeing to submit to such a test.

January 16, 2011

NY Crimes & Laws Involving Grand Larceny Embezzlement: A New York City Criminal Defense Attorney View Part I

by Jeremy Saland

When one thinks of Embezzlement in New York, one usually thinks of a Grand Larceny type scheme. While this may be true, experienced New York criminal lawyers will tell you that an Embezzlement based Grand Larceny investigation, arrest or indictment may only be the tip of the iceberg. In fact, while one’s main objective may be a theft, there are numerous other crimes that one may face if one is charged or arrested for Grand Larceny by Embezzlement in New York.

A savvy and experienced prosecutor is likely able to throw a litany of charges at you that tie back to a Grand Larceny and Embezzlement arrest. If one doesn’t stick, the prosecutor realizes that there are many additional charges that may. Obviously, some Embezzlement charges in New York are more serious than others. For most people, however, any type of felony conviction will cripple their career. While no New York criminal defense attorney can guarantee a particular result in the face of an Embezzlement charge, arrest or indictment, he or she should be able to assess your case, discuss the possible charges and implement a defense.

January 13, 2011

Lawrence “LT” Taylor Pleads Guilty to Sexual Misconduct and Patronizing a Prostitute to Satisfy Rape Charges: NY Criminal Lawyer Analysis

by Jeremy Saland

According to reports, ex-Giant Lawrence “L.T.” Taylor pleaded guilt to the misdemeanors of Patronizing a Prostitute and Sexual Misconduct this afternoon in full satisfaction of his arrest and charges stemming from his alleged statutory rape of a 16 year old girl. It is likely that LT saw the “writing on the wall” if he decided to fight the case at trial. Unfortunately, for Mr. Taylor, it is not a legal defense to say that he believed, genuinely or not, that the girl was 19 or 25 for that matter. The former All-Pro linebacker is not out of the woods yet. It appears as if Mr. Taylor will be sentenced to probation, but will also have to register as a sex offender.

Patronizing a Prostitute is a fairly straight forward offense. A person is guilty of Patronizing a Prostitute in the Third Degree, New York Penal Law 230.04, when he or she patronizes a prostitute. Generally, patronizing includes an agreement or exchange of sexual conduct (it need not be penetration) for a fee.

January 10, 2011

Unlwafull Imprisonment in New York: New York Penal Law Sections 135.05 and 135.10

by Jeremy Saland

The New York criminal defense lawyers at Saland Law PC, a New York City criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, recently drafted a criminal law information page for the crimes of Unlawful Imprisonment in the First Degree (New York Penal Law 135.10) and Unlawful Imprisonment in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 135.05). While not a substitute for a consultation with your own criminal defense attorney or an “advice” page, the Unlawful Imprisonment criminal law page is a good educational starting point for anyone accused of or arrested for this crime. Armed with the basic information as to how the degrees of the crime differ as well the critical difference between the legal terms of “restrain” and “abduct,” the information page can give you the basis to have an educated conversation with your attorney regarding the degrees of Unlawful Imprisonment and how they compare to the more serious offense of Kidnapping. Armed with this knowledge, you and your New York criminal defense attorney can the ascertain and implement the appropriate defense in your case.

The New York criminal defense attorneys at Saland Law PC represent the accused throughout New York City and the region. Commentary on cases in the news as well as legal analysis of court decisions and criminal statutes can be found on the New York Criminal Lawyer Blog.

January 6, 2011

Identity Theft Crimes in New York: When Concurrent Time May be a Consecutive Sentence

by Jeremy Saland

Identity Theft (New York Penal Law section 190.78, New York Penal Law section 190.79 and New York Penal Law section 190.80), one of the more prevalent crimes prosecuted by Assistant District Attorneys in New York, is often associated with offenses such as Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, Forgery and Grand Larceny. More often than not, when and if there is a plea to multiple charges in an indictment, the sentences run concurrent. This means that the sentence on all of the crimes run at the same time as opposed to after each other (this is called consecutive). One of the reasons that a sentence is completed this way is because the crimes are all part of the same transaction.

As noted above, in the realm of Identity Theft crimes in New York, the offenses are often times not on an island, but part of other criminal schemes. Therefore, one would hope that if a plea is the best option, that plea would run concurrent to other sentences. Sadly, for one individual, this was not the case.

January 2, 2011

New York Burglary Crimes: Does the Prosecution Need to Establish Your Intent to Commit a Particular Crime

by Jeremy Saland

Regardless of the degree, Burglary in New York (NY Penal Law sections 140.20, 140.25 and 140.30) requires that at the time you unlawfully enter or remain in a building you also have a simultaneous intent to commit a particular crime. Well, not really…This entry deals with the question of what the prosecution must prove regarding an accused burglar’s criminal intent and whether or not they must prove the intent to commit a specific crime.

The Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court, has addressed this issue in the past and answered it in a clear and decisive way. Prosecutors do not need to establish the particular crime that the accused intended to commit when he or she either unlawfully entered or remained in the building. The Court went as far as asserting that “[h]ad the Legislature intended [that the prosecution prove a specific crime] it could easily in revising the Penal Law have inserted the word ‘specified’ or the word ‘particular’ between ‘a”‘ and ‘crime.'” People v. Mackey, 49 N.Y.2d 274 (1980)