New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

May 5, 2010

Making Graffiti (NY PL 145.60), Possession of Graffiti Instruments (NY PL 145.65) & Your Criminal Defense: Does it Matter Under New York Law if You Did Not Intend to Damage Any Property or it in Fact was not Damaged?

If you have ever been arrested for Making Graffiti (New York Penal Law 145.60) or Possession of Graffiti Instruments (New York Penal Law 145.65) in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens or anywhere in New York City, you know that the Graffiti / Vandal Squad detectives are aggressive in their pursuit of alleged offenders. The bottom line is that Making Graffiti and Possession of Graffiti instruments is a serious offense in the eyes of law enforcement. If the damage is significant, prosecutors may seek restitution in addition to whatever the disposition might be.

Often times, the gravity of the alleged damage is tied to the ultimate deal in the case. This assumes, of course, that you have explored with your New York criminal defense attorney whether or not the prosecution can prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt or whether there are any legal, factual or procedural defenses to the allegations. Regardless, the question addressed in this entry is clear. What if it was not your intent to cause the damage? What if you were expressing yourself through your art? In other words, is it a defense to the crimes of Making Graffiti and Possession of a Graffiti instrument if you did not have the intent to cause damage when you painted, etched, or drew on another person’s property, or in the alternative, that the property was not damaged?

May 1, 2010

Criminal Possession of Stolen Property: New York Penal Law Sections 165.40 Through 165.54: Associated Legal Presumptions & Defenses

by Jeremy Saland

Much like the New York Grand Larceny statutes, Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in New York ranges from a misdemeanor (NY PL 165.40) punishable by up to one year in jail (often associated with New York shoplifting and Desk Appearance Tickets throughout Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx) to a felony punishable by up to 8 and 1/3 to 25 years in state prison. Before addressing the legal presumptions and defenses set forth in the penal law, I will briefly address each of the varying levels of Criminal Possession of Stolen Property solely as it relates to the value of the property.

Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in Fifth Degree – NY PL 165.40

April 28, 2010

Three Arrested for Allegedly Defrauding Department of Education & New York City Over Multiple Years

by Jeremy Saland

Manhattan District Attorney, Cyrus Vance, Jr. is flexing his new found muscles. While his predecessor, Robert Morgenthau, routinely tackled schemes into the multiple millions of dollars, District Attorney Vance is just beginning find his feet and to make a name for himself. Far from a “big money” splash, the chief prosecutor of New York County has still sent a very loud message to would be fraudsters who violate the government and public trust…don’t do it.

According to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office press release, three individuals were arrested and indicted on multiple felonies for a $100,000 no show job as a custodian and a ticket payoff scheme.

April 27, 2010

Brooklyn DA Busts 32 Alleged Welfare Fraud Cheats: Nearly $1 Million in Fraud Alleged

by Jeremy Saland

According to the Brooklyn (Kings County) District Attorneys Office, 32 people have been arrested and indicted in connection to individual incidents of Welfare Fraud amounting to nearly $1 million. Although not part of a ring, these individuals face varying felonies including Welfare Fraud in the Second Degree (NY PL 158.20) and Third Degree (158.15), Grand Larceny in the Second Degree (NY PL 155.40) and Third Degree (155.25) as well as multiple counts of Offering a False Instrument for Filing in the First Degree (NY PL 175.35). Whether or not they are first time offenders, the crimes range from “E,” “D,” and “C” felonies punishable by up to 4, 7 and 15 years respectively.

According to the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office:

April 24, 2010

New York Penal Law 170.65: Forgery of a Vehicle Identification Number & Your Criminal Defense

by Jeremy Saland

New York Criminal defense attorneys from Manhattan and Brooklyn to Queens and Westchester County regularly represent individuals arrested or investigated for the crime of New York Forgery in its various shapes and sizes. When the Forgery in New York involves a “written instrument,” the applicable crime, depending on a few factors, is either New York Penal Law 170.05, New York Penal Law 170.10 or New York Penal Law 170.15. The latter two offenses are felonies while the first offense is a misdemeanor. One particular offense relating to Forgery that is applicable to crimes involving cars and other vehicles is New York Penal Law 170.65, Forgery of a Vehicle Identification Number.

According to New York Penal Law 170.65, a person is guilty of Forgery of a Vehicle Identification Number when, among other potential factors:

April 20, 2010

Criminal Impersonation & Your Criminal Defense: New York Penal Law Sections 190.25 & 190.26

by Jeremy Saland

Before the dawn of identity theft laws, the crime of Criminal Impersonation, pursuant to New York Penal Law sections 190.25 and 190.26, was the weapon of the assistant district attorney to prosecute fraud crimes related to one’s identification or persona in New York. This entry will address the crime of Criminal Impersonation in Second Degree (NY PL 190.25) and Criminal Impersonation in the First Degree (NY PL 190.26). A second entry will address legal decisions applicable to these laws.

Criminal Impersonation in the Second Degree – New York Penal Law 190.25

April 16, 2010

NY Penal Law Sections 250.45 & 250.50: Your Criminal Defense & Unlawful Surveillance in the Second Degree & First Degrees

by Jeremy Saland

That secret video recorder you installed capturing someone undressing in a hotel bedroom, the changing room or in your tenant’s apartment may land you in serious trouble. While you may think it is funny to show your friends images of a person you filmed while you were intimate without that person knowing, it will be far from humorous when you find yourself charged with either Unlawful Surveillance in the Second Degree pursuant to New York Penal Law section 250.45 or Unlawful Surveillance in the First Degree pursuant to New York Penal Law 250.50.

Although a serious offense, there may be numerous defenses to the crimes of Unlawful Surveillance pursuant to New York Penal Law sections 250.45 and 250.50. For example, did the subject of the surveillance or video consent to the recordings and is there any corroboration of that? Obviously, making such an argument where the installation is in a fitting room, bathroom or other “personal space” may be difficult. That being said, was the search of the location or computer used in the alleged crime conducted with probable cause and with a search warrant? Do you have standing to challenge that search? Whatever the facts, discuss the them with your New York criminal defense attorney to ascertain and implement the best defense you deem appropriate. Having briefly glossed over the severity of the crime and potential defenses, the follow are the definitions involving Unlawful Surveillance in New York:

April 13, 2010

Unlicensed Practice of a Profession: Spa Owner Allegedly Performs Liposuction & Other Procedures Leaving Patient Near Death

by Jeremy Saland

According to Queens District Attorney Richard Brown, a spa owner, Barbara Nieto, is alleged to have performed liposuction suction to a patient’s stomach and injected the fat into her buttocks for a $500 fee. Unfortunately, not only is Ms. Nieto allegedly not licensed to practice medicine or similar procedures at Perfect Image Stethics (located at 40-63 Junction Boulevard) or Bell Stetika Esthetics and Spa (located at 93-28A Corona Avenue), but it is further alleged that the patient nearly died due to her injuries.

Although often associated with individuals giving unlicensed massages or wrongfully practicing as an attorney, the practice of any profession without a license where one is required is not permissible under New York State Law. Ms. Nieto stands charged with Unauthorized Practice of a Profession, pursuant to Education Law section 6512, and faces up to four years in prison on that “E” felony. Additionally, Ms. Nieto is charged with multiple “D” felonies where she faces up to seven years in state prison if convicted. Those offenses are Reckless Endangerment in the First Degree, pursuant to New york Penal Law 120.25, and two separate counts of a Assault in the Second Degree, pursuant to New York Penal Law 120.05.

April 12, 2010

New York Vehicle and Traffic Law (VTL) Section 511: Aggravated Unlicensed Operation of a Vehcile – Definition & Your NY Criminal Defense

by Jeremy Saland

A common offense handled by New York criminal defense attorneys, Vehicle and Traffic Law section 511 (“VTL 511”) is a crime in New York where a person operates a motor vehicle while his or her right to do so is suspended. Although there are varying degrees from misdemeanor to felony, one of the most common of these crimes is Aggravated Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle in the Third Degree pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law section 511(1)(a) (“VTL 511(1)(a)). New York Aggravated Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle in the Third Degree is defined in general terms as follows:

One is guilty of the of Aggravated Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle in the Third Degree when one is operating a motor vehicle (car, truck, etc.) on a public highway (just about any public road, street, etc.). At the same time, one must know or have a reason to know one’s privilege, right or license in New York is suspended, revoked or otherwise withdrawn.

April 9, 2010

White Plains Mayor Adam Bradley Arrested Again for Domestic Violence: Allegedly Tells Wife to Hang Herself

by Jeremy Saland

The political nightmare and familial anguish that has enveloped White Plains (Westchester County) Mayor Adam Bradley was magnified exponentially yesterday when he was arrested and arraigned on new charges of alleged domestic violence against his wife Fumiko. According to the court complaint against Mayor Bradley, the former Assemblyman is charged with three offenses including two misdemeanors of Contempt in the Second Degree and Tampering with a Witness in the Fourth Degree.

Although his wife had previously indicated that she would not cooperate with the police or Westchester County District Attorney’s Office, it appears that the alleged abuse pushed Ms. Bradley too far. According to the complaint, Mayor Bradley accused his wife on multiple occasions as either being crazy, a lier or the abuser in the relationship. Moreover, it is alleged that Mayor Bradley went as far as telling his wife she should kill herself by hanging.