New York Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

In People v. Baker, [Slip Op. 100618] the Appellate Division Third Department upheld a county court decision to set aside the verdict convicting the defendant of the crimes of vehicular manslaughter and driving while intoxicated because the People had not elicited proof of calibration of the device used when analyzing the defendant’s blood.

In People v. Neptune, [Slip Op. 04731] , the Appellate Division Second Department ordered a new trial for the defendant who was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree because the court over defense counsel’ objection repeatedly defined the term ‘Recklessly” in a manner that substantially deviated from the Penal Law definition and from the pattern criminal jury instructions.

In People v. Crespi, [Slip Op. 04882], the Appellate Division Second Department reversed a lower court’s ruling that penal law §120.05(10) is unconstitutional and remitted the matter to the county court for a new determination on the issue of whether penal law §120.05(10) is unconstitutional because the State Attorney General’s Office had not been put on notice in accordance with CPLR 1012(b) and Executive Law §71.

In People v. John, [Slip Op. 04543], the Appellate Division Second Department held that the defendant was not deprived a fair trial when the trial court administered a third Allen Charge. In People v. Sanders, [Slip Op. 04552], the Appellate Division Second Department, held the court did not make an error when it granted a mistrial – instead of giving a fourth Allen Charge-when the jury sent a fourth note to the judge stating they were deadlock.

In People v. Charlotten, [Slip Op 16757] the Appellate Division Third Department vacated the defendant’s conviction on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel because the defense counsel had allowed his client to plead guilty to violating a temporary order of protection that had become invalid.

In People v. Jean-Laurent [Slip Op 04542] the Appellate Division Second Department ruled that the lower court properly determined that the EMT was qualified to render an opinion that the complainant’s injuries were caused by two blows from a blunt instrument.

In People v. Hough [Slip Op 04541] the Appellate Division Second Department held that the county court properly admitted into evidence expert testimony on the issue of whether the quantity of PCP discovered in the defendant’s possession was consistent with packaging for street sale, as opposed to personal use.

Posted by George P. Conway | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Recent Legislation-2008

Bookmark:

The New York State Constitution gives the governor of New York the power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons after conviction for all offenses except treason and cases of impeachment. Governor David A. Paterson announced yesterday that he has exercised that power in favor of renowned rapper Ricky “Slick Rick” Walters for his 1991 attempted murder and weapon convictions. The full and unconditional pardon was granted to assist Mr. Walters -who emigrated from the United Kingdom to the United States at the age of eleven-to attempt to avoid deportation.

Mr. Walters is probably best known as the rapper who recorded "La-Di-Da-Di" and "Children's Story".

In June 1991, Mr. Walters pled guilty in the Bronx County Supreme Court to multiple felonies which according to NYS Department of Correctional Services' records included: attempted murder in the second degree (class B Felony); criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree [class C felony]; criminal use of firearms in the first degree (class C felony); and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree [class D felony]. He was sentenced to 3 1/3 years to 10 years in state prison. Mr. Walter's was eligible for parole on February 4, 1994 but was not released from state prison until June 4, 1997. He was under the supervision of parole following his release from state prison. He was discharged from parole supervision on or about October 4, 2000.

Continue reading " New York Governor Pardons Ricky “Slick Rick” Walters " »

Posted by George P. Conway | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Recent News

Bookmark:

New York Penal Law §65.35 has been amended to increase the cost of mandatory surcharges and crime victim assistance fees. The mandatory surcharge in felony cases under the penal law is being raised from two hundred and fifty dollars up to three hundred dollars. The mandatory surcharge in misdemeanor cases under the penal law is being raised from one hundred forty dollars up to one hundred seventy-five dollars. The mandatory surcharge in violation cases under the penal law is being raised from seventy-five dollars up to ninety-five dollars. The crime victim assistance fee in all such cases is being raised from twenty dollars up to twenty-five dollars.

New York Vehicle and Traffic Law §1809 has also been amended to increase the cost of certain mandatory surcharges and crime victim fees. The crime victim assistance fee in felony and misdemeanor drinking and driving law cases is being increased from twenty dollars up to twenty-five dollars. [VTL §1809(1)(b)] The mandatory surcharge in felony drinking and driving cases is being raised from two hundred and fifty dollars up to three hundred dollars. [VTL §1809(b)(i) The mandatory surcharge in misdemeanor drinking and driving cases is being raised from one hundred forty dollars up to one hundred seventy-five dollars. [VTL § 1809(b)(ii)] The additional surcharge collected in drinking and driving cases on behalf of the state comptroller has been increased from twenty-five dollars up to one hundred ninety-five dollars. [VTL§§1809-c and1809-e (b)] The mandatory surcharge in certain other vehicle and traffic law cases has been increased from forty-five dollars up to fifty-five dollars. [VTL §1809(1)(c)] There is also now an additional surcharge for those certain other vehicle and traffic law cases of twenty dollars collected on behalf of the state comptroller. [ VTL§ 1809-e (a). ] The crime victim assistance fee in those other vehicle and traffic law cases is still five dollars. [VTL§ 1809(1)(c)] The town and village fee is also still five dollars. [VTL§1809(9)] The surcharge for equipment violations is still thirty dollars. [VTL§ 1809(1)(a)]. The additional mandatory surcharge for violations of maximum speed limits in highway construction or maintenace work areas is still fifty dollars. [ VTL §1809-d]

All of the above amendments will take effect July 1, 2008 except the increase in the additional sucharge collected on behalf of the state comptroller which will take effect August 1, 2008. [VTL §1809 and 1809-e] The senate bill number is S06806C. The assembly bill number is A09806C.

A copy of a memo from the State of New York Office of the State Comptroller to Town and Village Justices and Court Clerks regarding the new mandatory surcharges and Fees can Be found at: http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/finreporting/jcef/070908.pdf

Posted by George P. Conway | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Recent Legislation-2008

Bookmark:

Any person after October 31, 2008 who etches, paints, draws or otherwise places or displays a noose on any private or public building or other real property without the express permission of the owner or operator of such building or real property with the intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm another person because of a belief or perception regarding such person’s race, color, national origin, gender, religion, religious practice, age disability or sexual orientation shall be guilty of the crime of aggravated harassment in the first degree. Aggravated harassment in the first degree is a E-Felony punishable by up to four years in prison. [PL§240.31 ] The bill was sponsored by Senator Skelos (S6499) and Assemblyman Lentol (A9480) . Governor David A. Paterson announced he signed the bill into law on May 15, 2008. The bill was drafted in response to the Jena Six incident.

Posted by George P. Conway | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Recent Legislation-2008

Bookmark:

On May 14, 2008, the governor of New York-David A. Paterson- announced he signed the Electronic Security and Targeting of Online Predators Act (e-STOP) sponsored by Senator Dean Skelos (S06875) and Assemblyman Joseph Lentol (A09859) . This new law: (1) requires convicted sex offenders to register their internet screen names with the Sex Offender Registry; (2) allows social networking web-sites -like Face Book and My Space- to obtain those screen names in order to prohibit those account holders from entering web-sites on which they could contact children; and (3) prohibits convicted sex offenders who are on probation, conditional discharge or parole from using the internet to contact children. A person listed on the Sex Offender Registry who fails to register any Internet or email account used for the purpose of online chatting, instant messaging or social networking or fails to timely notify the state that they have changed their e-mail address or created a new on-line profile is guilty of a felony. The new law applies to all past and future individuals listed on the Sex Offender Registry and takes effect immediately.

Posted by George P. Conway | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Recent Legislation-2008

Bookmark:

As of May 18, 2008, a person is guilty of assault in the second degree if he or she intentionally causes physical injury to another person who is more than ten years their senior and who is age sixty-five years or older. Assault in the second degree is a class D violent felony that is punishable by up to seven years in prison. [PL§§120.05;70.02(1)(c); 70.02(3)(c)] The bill was sponsored by New York State Senator Golden (S06979) and New York State Assemblyman Silver (A9818) . New York State Governor David A. Paterson announced the bill was signed on May 2, 2008. The law was passed in response to last years savage beatings of 101 year old Rose Morat and 85 year old Solange Elizee of Queens, New York. The law is known as “ Granny’s Law”.

Posted by George P. Conway | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Recent Legislation-2008

Bookmark:

There are two categories of hazing in New York. There is hazing in the first degree which is a class A misdemeanor and there is hazing in the second degree which is a violation. [PL §§ 120.16 and PL 120.17]

A person commits the crime of hazing in the first degree if he or she, in the course of another person’s initiation or affiliation with any organization, intentionally or recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of physical injury to that other person or a third person and thereby causes such injury. [PL§ 120.16] A person commits the offense of hazing in the second degree if he or she, in the course of another person’s initiation or affiliation with any organization, intentionally or recklessly engage in conduct which create substantial risk of physical injury to that other person or a third person. [PL §120.17] Thus, the key distinguishing factor between hazing in the first degree and hazing in the second degree is whether the conduct of the accused caused another person physical injury.

A person convicted of hazing in the first degree is subject to up to one year in jail, three years probation, a fine of up to one thousand dollars; a maximum surcharge of up to one hundred forty dollars and a maximum crime victim assistance fee of twenty dollars. [PL §§ 70.15(1); 80.05(1); 65.00 (3)(b); and 60.35(1)(a)(ii). An additional five dollar surcharge must be paid if the case is pending in a town or village court. [PL §60.35(9)]

A person convicted of hazing in the second degree is subject to up to fifteen days in jail, a fine of up to two hundred fifty dollars; a maximum surcharge of seventy five dollars and a crime victim assistance fee of twenty dollars.[ PL § 70.15(4); 80.05(4). An additional five dollar surcharge must be paid if the case is pending in a town or village court. [PL §60.35(9)]

Posted by George P. Conway | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: New York Crimes

Bookmark: