Drug Possesion

Published on: June 30, 2012

Defendant Contends Prior Conviction Should Not be Held Against Him

by Stephen Bilkis

On March 21, 2002, a defendant was sentenced to two years of probation in Michigan for attempted home invasion in the first degree. On August 22, 2003, the same man was charged in the Bronx with criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance (drug possession) in the third and seventh degrees. On October 22, 2003, the man entered a plea of guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

He was advised by the judge that if he participated in a drug rehabilitation program at a supervised treatment accountability for safer communities facility, that he would be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea. He would then be sentenced as a misdemeanor and able to perform time served. However, if he did not comply with the agreement, he would be sentenced to four and one half to nine years confinement.

On December 4, 2003, he was released to enter the drug program. One week later the treatment center reported that he had failed to complete the program successfully and had stopped coming after the first week. He was arrested again, and appeared on August 4, 2005 when he was picked up on the warrant following being charged in Michigan under an assumed name for assault with intent to murder, assault with intent to do great bodily harm but not murder, and assault with a dangerous weapon. The Michigan court allowed the defendant to plead nolo contender to the assault with intent to murder. He was also allowed to plead nolo to the dangerous weapons charge. He was sentenced to an indeterminate term in prison from two to fifteen years, plus two years for the felony firearms charge to run consecutively.

Published on: June 29, 2012

Can the Mentally Ill Understand the Consequences of Their Actions?

by Stephen Bilkis

Legality as it involves persons who are mentally ill can become convoluted. Many cases have reached crossroads where the offender is mentally ill. The rights of the victim become confused with the ability of the offender to understand what occurred. In some cases, it is an even more horrendous injustice. At what point is a person mentally incompetent to understand that the actions that they took are wrong. A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said if they are sent for treatment at a treatment facility, does that mean that they should not serve any prison time related to the offense that they committed. If they are not penalized for their actions, what message is the system sending to the victim of the crime?

These questions have plagued the criminal justice system since the beginning of time. The question becomes one of intent. Is the intent of the criminal justice system to punish; or is the intent of the system to rehabilitate? Are prisons, just places to keep the public safe for a time from the behavior of inmates; or are they places to rehabilitate them? A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said some states have adopted laws that allow for a guilty but mentally ill finding in a trial. In cases of guilty, but mentally ill, the offender is sent to a secure mental illness hospital until they are determined to have been cured of their illness; only then do they report to the prison to begin serving their time for the offense that they committed. In that manner, they are fully aware that an insanity defense is not a get out of jail free card. They are required to serve the time for the crime that they committed.

In 1984, many of these issues were brought to the attention of the general public when a man was convicted of raping a woman among several other heinous crimes in New York. He was convicted on January 8, 1981, in front of a jury for his crimes. However, he was determined to be mentally incompetent to understand or take responsibility for his crimes. He was determined to be suffering from a dangerous mental disorder. He was sentenced to an indeterminate sentence in a secure mental illness facility. A Queens Drug Possession Lawyer said the Commissioner of Mental Hygiene was responsible for reviewing the case on a regular basis. In September of 1981, and again on October 27, 1982, the Orange County Court signed first and second retention orders ensuring that the defendant was continued in the care of the secure mental hospital that he had been sent to originally.

Published on: June 29, 2012

Rape Charges Dismissed for Lack of Evidence

by Stephen Bilkis

The man was charged with kidnapping in the second degree, two counts of assault in the second degree, attempted rape in the first degree and attempted sexual abuse in the first degree. The man was also charged with similar counts previously involving another woman but was later dismissed.

Evidently, the only proof of the man’s alleged criminal acts was the testimony of the complainant, who first reported the incident to the police when the police came to interview her in connection with the reported attack on the other woman. The complainant specifically testified that one afternoon, she brought her three children to her neighbor’s apartment because she intended to go to a hospital to fill a prescription. On that event, the man was also there and volunteered to go downstairs to call a taxicab for her. It was about 4:15 P.M. or 4:30 P.M. when the complainant entered the taxicab. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the man then suddenly climbed in behind her and told the driver to pull off and keep driving. The ride lasted more than 10 minutes and maybe about two hours. At the cab, the man told the complainant that she was going to pay for what everyone had done to him. When the complainant responded that she didn’t know what the man was talking about, the man kept repeating that she was paying for what had happened to him and she should shut up. The man then began to hit the complainant about her face with his fists. The man continually assaulted the complainant throughout the ride. At one point, the man struck her in the back of her head with a gun and stated that he would kill the complainant because she was paying for what everybody did to him.

Afterwards, the man also asked the taxicab driver if he wanted to watch him killing the complainant. At another point, the man told the complainant that if she told anyone about what happened in the taxicab he would kill her son. As darkness set in, the ride ended at a vacant parking lot and the complainant could not recall the lot’s exact location but estimated that it was about two miles from her home. At the parking lot, the man pulled the complainant out of the taxicab. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the man again threatened to kill the complainant’s son if she screamed and he invited the taxicab driver to punch the complainant. The taxicab driver punched the complainant in her mouth with his fist. The man continually screamed at the complainant and again struck her in the back of her head with the gun. The man also punched the complainant in her stomach causing her to fall to the ground. As she passed into unconsciousness, the man told the complainant that he was going to rape her. The complainant woke up the next morning and the only clothes left on her was her shirt and socks. She had a lump on her head, her stomach and genitals felt sore, and her legs felt sore, wet and sticky. She found the rest of her clothes strewn about the parking lot.

Published on: June 29, 2012

Defendant Claims Bringing Up Prior Acts Prejudiced Jury

by Stephen Bilkis

Drug Possession crimes are a problem in every city in the United States, but courts do not usually expect to find them on their own back doorsteps. In the case of the Supreme Court of Bronx County in 1972, they did not expect to find the drug problem on the very steps of the courthouse. However, that is exactly what transpired in September of 1972. An undercover narcotics team was working a case involving a drug ring that was operating out of Franz Segal Park just around the corner from the Bronx County Supreme Court building. The narcotics undercover team made three different purchases of narcotics from the dealer on September 8, 11, and 12.

The undercover officer would meet with the dealer in Franz Park, make the purchase, and then return to the team with the cocaine. The narcotic would be tested to ensure that it was cocaine. The undercover officer was wearing a wire so that the transaction was tape recorded. However, there was no video at the time that was effective in the field. Following the third purchase, the defendant was arrested for trafficking in narcotics. In his trial, he testified that he was not a drug dealer and that he had never sold anyone any drugs. The undercover team had to testify that they had not witnessed the transactions and had only seen the undercover officer leave with the money and come back with the cocaine (cocaine possession).

Interestingly, at trial the prosecutor questioned the officer extensively about the purchases that he made from the defendant in Franz Park. He went in to great detail to show that the time and place of the transaction for which the defendant was charged was identical to the time and place in which he had previously been arrested for dealing drugs. The problem with this line of questioning was that according to the law, prior offenses can only be brought up in trial to show the credibility of the witness. A prosecutor may not use questioning on previous acts to show a propensity to commit the crime that the defendant is on trial. That policy is set forth in People v. Schwartzman, Supra, 24 N.Y.2d p. 247, 299 N.Y.S. 2d p. 822, 247 N.E.2d p. 645. The crimes for which the prosecutor was referring were the two prior drug deals that were under indictment, yet not adjudicated by the time of the trial in question.

Published on: June 28, 2012

Is Rape During a Hospital Stay Medical Malpractice?

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

At the time of the rape, the victim (or claimant) was 20 years of age and had a history of psychiatric problems, including several hospitalizations. She was hospitalized at South Beach in 1990 after trying to jump from a window. Other probable suicide attempts include setting the bathroom and her bathrobe on fire, drowning in the bathtub, and choking herself with a cloth while being transported in an ambulance. In 1990, she apparently attacked her father over whether she could leave the house late one night.

A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said in August of 1992, the claimant was admitted to South Beach after she had spoken about suicide, been unable to sleep, had bouts of crying and told of hearing voices. At that time she had been attending a Mental Health Center. On 9 September 1992, after nearly a three-week hospitalization, the claimant was discharged; the discharge note described her stay as “uneventful”.

Published on: June 27, 2012

Defendant Contends All Evidence Is Circumstantial

by Stephen Bilkis

A woman who lived alone in an apartment in Manhattan called her boyfriend who lived in the Bronx. She said that a man was in her apartment. The man (the accused) had knocked and asked her if she could help him find the man who had raped his wife and pushed her down the stairs thus suffering a miscarriage. The woman asked the man to speak with her boyfriend on the telephone. A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said that the boyfriend talked with the man for about five minutes. And then the man put the phone down. The girlfriend came back on the line and hastily said goodbye to her boyfriend.

The boyfriend, alarmed, hurried to her girlfriend’s apartment. He asked the building superintendent to open the door. He found his girlfriend lying lifeless with a knife stuck in her abdomen in a pool of her blood. A panty hose was tied and knotted tightly around her neck. Her lingerie drawer was open and her underwear was strewn all over.

The police soon came and found a hair on the woman’s mouth. The investigators determined that the woman was strangled and the bones in her neck had been broken.

Published on: June 26, 2012

Court Discusses Use of Uncorroborated Evidence

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

On 10 October 1965, defendant broke and entered a room, housing at that time the complainant alone, armed with a knife, forcibly committed upon her person (according to the complainant’s testimony) an act of consummated, though uncorroborated, rape.

Thereafter, defendant is charged with the crimes of Burglary Third Degree (Breaking and Entering a Building with Intent to Commit a Crime therein) and Assault First Degree (Assault with Intent to Commit a Felony upon the person of the one Assaulted with a Deadly Weapon) in two separate counts.

Published on: June 26, 2012

Issue of Consent Discussed in Rape Charge

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

On 21 May 2008, as amended on 28 May 2008, defendant was convicted by the Supreme Court, Bronx County of rape in the third degree, a criminal law violation. He was sentenced as a second felony offender to a term of 2 to 4 years.

The Ruling:

Published on: June 25, 2012

Court Said Element of Penal Law Lacking

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

On 10 October 1965, defendant broke and entered a room, housing at that time the complainant alone, armed with a knife, forcibly committed upon her person (according to the complainant’s testimony) an act of consummated, though uncorroborated, rape.

Thereafter, defendant is charged with the crimes of Burglary Third Degree (Breaking and Entering a Building with Intent to Commit a Crime therein) and Assault First Degree (Assault with Intent to Commit a Felony upon the person of the one Assaulted with a Deadly Weapon) in two separate counts.

Published on: June 24, 2012

Defendant Files a 440 Motion

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

Defendant was originally charged with Rape in the First Degree, Sodomy in the First Degree, Sexual Abuse in the First Degree, and Menacing in the Third Degree.

Thereafter, defendant was found guilty of Sodomy in the First Degree but not guilty on the rest of the charges. Defendant was sentenced on 4 December 2002 to a 25 year determinate state prison sentence.