Info
Featured In
Media Badges

by

Although it sounded horrific on paper, the New York criminal defense lawyers at Saland Law PC arguably obtained the best result for a client charged with Criminal Possession of a Weapon (a .380 handgun), Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance (cocaine), Unlawful Possession of Marijuana and Driving with a Suspended License. Despite the allegations, our client pleaded to the violation of Disorderly Conduct. This disposition avoided not only a criminal record, but jail or probation.

Our client, a resident of North Carolina, came to New York to visit family. Unaware of the laws here, the client brought a legally registered firearm from his home state into New York. When he was pulled over for an alleged traffic infraction, the police also found some marijuana and cocaine on his person in an amount consistent with personal use. Compounding matters, our client was driving on a suspended license for old tickets he was unaware about.

Continue reading

by

Saland Law PC, a New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors, is pleased to announce the completion of the Burglary (NY Penal Law 140.20, 140.25 and 140.30) and Robbery (New York Penal Law 160.05, 160.10 and 160.15) information pages. Although no substitute for an in depth legal and factual discussion with your New York criminal defense attorney, the Burglary and Robbery pages contain significant information to begin your education into these crimes.

Burglary and Robbery are the two crimes that people often confuse. Generally, Burglary involves the unlawful entering of a building with the intent to commit a crime. Usually, this crime is a theft. Robbery, on the other hand, is a forcible stealing from an individual. Each of these crimes have numerous “escalation factors” including whether there was more than one person involved in the crime, whether there were any weapons involved and whether a non participant was injured.

Continue reading

by

In the decade or more that I have been involved in the criminal justice system as a criminal defense attorney and Manhattan prosecutor, I have heard some real doozies from people attempting to get out of jury duty. This passion to get out of jury duty is rarely, if ever, matched by those willing to put their own lives to the side to serve as jurors. Yet, a woman in Staten Island clearly has bucked that trend. In fact, she was arrested earlier today and is awaiting arraignment for desperately trying to get on jury duty (well, sort of…).

According to the New York Post, police arrested Rebecca Thybulle after she missed eight days of work at her government job. Wanting to take some time off, it is alleged that she created a jury summons as well as proof of jury service for her employer in order to answer for her eight day absence. It is alleged that Ms.Thybulle went as far as to tell her boss that she was on a vehicular homicide case. As happy as her fellow New Yorkers may have been to hear she enthusiastically embraced her civic duty, it is alleged that her boss found evidence of the forged summons and proof of jury service on Ms. Thybulle’s desk. With a slight twist of irony, Ms. Thybulle may be sitting for jurors, but not for jury duty. Instead, she may be sitting to pick jurors to hear her case and the two counts of Forgery in the Second Degree she now faces. If convicted, Ms. Thybulle is looking at up to seven years in prison on each count (it would likely run concurrent).

Continue reading

by

As a New York shoplifting criminal defense attorney and former Manhattan prosecutor, I have encountered almost every form of shoplifting (New York Penal Law 155.25 – Petit Larceny and New York Penal Law 165.40 – Criminal Possession of Stolen Property). Whether the accused is arrested and issued a shoplifting Desk Appearance Ticket or put through the system, the way it unfolds is often the same. While I have blogged extensively on New York shoplifting laws, this entry will address potential offers made by prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office for shoplifting crimes. The overriding factor, beyond whether one has a record, is the value of the property stolen. The following is a list of common offers for first time offenders. However, it is critical to note that offer guiltiness change.

Shoplifting for Approximately $100 or Less

Continue reading

by

The New York white collar criminal defense attorneys at Saland Law PC are pleased to announce that another client avoided both a felony conviction and incarceration after being charged with numerous felonies involving theft and fraud. Prosecutors had alleged that our client embezzled in excess of $32,000 from our client’s employer. If convicted of the crimes of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree (NY PL 155.35) and Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree (NY PL 175.10), our client faced up to seven and four years in state prison respectively.

In this particular case, prosecutors alleged that our client siphoned cash payments directed to the employer and that our client entered false data or caused inaccurate data to be entered into the computer system of the business to cover up the alleged fraud. After negotiations and the presentation of other factors, prosecutors permitted our client to plea to a lesser misdemeanor of Petit Larceny (the “shoplifting statute”) and receive a conditional discharge where the judge instructed our client to stay out of trouble for one year. Although our client admitted to some wrongdoing, he was not crippled by his past and he will avoid the collateral consequences and stigma of a felony conviction as well as incarceration.

Continue reading

by

I previously addressed New York’s Leandra’s Law as it relates to new offenses and crimes in the realm of Driving While Intoxicated (DWI / DUI) pursuant to New York Vehicle and Traffic Law section 1192. The two major changes to the law are that is now an automatic felony to perpetrate a DWI with a child fifteen years old or younger in the vehicle (VTL 1192.2-a(b) / 1192(2a)(b)) and if one is convicted of DWI one must install an ignition interlock device in one’s vehicle. Both of these laws have been addressed in earlier entries. Information can be found through the respective links.

This entry will address the new statutes and crimes established by the legislature in New York for those accused of disobeying the new ignition interlock device laws. Each of the following DWI crimes relating to the circumvention of an ignition interlock device in New York are “A” misdemeanors.

Continue reading

by

Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance…Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance…heroin, crack-cocaine and cocaine (note that marijuana is not a Controlled Substance crime). Your NY criminal defense attorney has heard of these crimes before and it is likely you have as well. However, what we have all learned and grown accustomed to over the years may no longer be valid. Why? The old Rockefeller drug laws in NY have drastically changed. We, the NY criminal defense lawyers at Saland Law PC, have reviewed the applicable statutes as they relate to to the possession and sale of drugs and will address some of these changes in our first entry on this subject.

Pursuant to the first change in the Rockefeller drug laws, “B” drug felonies found in Penal Law section 220.39 – Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the Third Degree and New York Penal Law section 220.16 – Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Third Degree, required a mandatory term of imprisonment for a first time felony offender between one and nine years. The recent change now permits sentences that are a mix of probation and jail or even straight probation. Moreover, Willard, an inpatient drug treatment program and facility, is available for these first time offenders. Another change provided by the amended statutes authorizes courts to placed defendants convicted of the “B” drug crimes into SHOCK incarceration where previously a judge did not have the ability to do so. Previously, the NYS Department of Corrections had the authority to make this determination and could deny SHOCK even if a judge requested it.

Continue reading

by

In New York State, Grand Larceny is one of the most common white collar crimes that prosecutors charge. Although the level of the crime can range from Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree (NY PL 155.30(1)) punishable by up to 4 years in prison to Grand Larceny in the First Degree (NY PL 155.42) punishable by up to 25 years prison, the following is a New York Grand Larceny “primer” as the law applies to the value of property allegedly stolen. For further information on different sections of the Grand Larceny statute and how the law may impact your particular defense, follow the links below. Having said that, Grand Larceny in New York is defined as follows:

Grand Larceny in the 4th Degree – New York Penal Law Section 155.30(1)

Continue reading

by

It is common throughout New York City and the region for judges to grant prosecutors’ requests for orders of protection whereby no contact between a complainant and defendant is permitted. These “full” orders of protection are often requested in other counties, such as in Brooklyn and Westchester, where the parties don’t even know each other and are complete strangers. What is concerning for the accused, however, is where a “full” order of protection is issued that ultimately requires one party to vacate their own home. Unquestionably, these orders of protection are often necessary to protect one individual from another. However, “full” orders of protection are also implemented where there is merely an accusation without full investigation. Prosecutors, taking the side of caution, may ask for these orders of protection, but amend them at a later date. Unfortunately, what happens to the accused if they must leave their home, their property and their possessions behind while they wait for a prosecutor or detective to conduct their investigation? What is this person to do for the weeks or months that he or she may not have access to his or her property?

Fortunately, there is a potential remedy or at least a means to challenge the order of protection in New York. If your “personal or property rights will be directly and specifically affected,” by a “full” order of protection, your attorney can request a “Forman Hearing.” Having said that, merely requesting one does not mean such a hearing will be granted and you will be successful. It is the accused’s burden to establish this direct and specific affect. Once having done so, the court must ascertain and weigh this affect against the danger(s) to the complainant. See People v. Foreman, 145. Misc. 2d 115 (NY Cty. Crim. Ct. 1989).

Continue reading

by

Leandra’s Law in New York has made the consequences of a misdemeanor Driving While Intoxicated (DWI or DUI) conviction that much more severe. If it wasn’t clear that prosecutors and judges in New York have had a zero or minimal tolerance policy for the crimes of Vehicle and Traffic Law (VTL) 1192, Leandra’s Law has done away with those questions. As of August 15, 2010, anyone convicted of a DWI misdemeanor not only faces the potential fines, programs and other penalties, but now one must place a mandatory ignition interlocking device on one’s car for at least six months.

The ignition interlock device required by Leandra’s law must be blown into prior to the car starting. Moreover, at random times during the vehicle’s operation, the device requires a sampling to prevent the vehicle from shutting down. It is interesting to note that not only must the individual convicted of New York DWI / DUI (VTL 1192) have this device placed in their vehicle, but they are not permitted to drive other vehicles that do not have the apparatus set up. In the event you do so or tamper with the interlock device, you will face new and additional misdemeanor charges.

Continue reading

Contact Information
52 Duane St 7th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Office: 212.312.7129Fax: 212.918.9375
By appointment only
50 Main St #1000
White Plains, NY 10606
By appointment only
254 S Main St #500
New City, NY 10956
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING - Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Saland Law PC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design