New York

Published on: July 4, 2012

Court Defines Category 2 Sex Offender

by Stephen Bilkis

The plaintiff for this case is the People of the State of New York. The defendant of the case is Marcus Wiggins. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York in Bronx County. Judge Dominic R. Massaro is presiding over the case.

The issue in front of the court is what risk level the defendant should be assessed at. The defendant pled guilty to attempted sexual abuse (sex crimes) in the first degree. The People in accordance with the Sexual Offenders Registration Act and the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders state that the defendant Marcus Wiggins should be designated as a Sexually Violent Offender, Risk Level 2, when he is released. The defendant argues that this designation is incorrect. He states that 25 points were wrongfully added to his assessment for engaging in sexual intercourse, aggravated sexual abuse, or deviate sexual intercourse with the victim. The defendant states that he was convicted of an attempt and for this reason is not guilty of any of the above.

Case Facts

Published on: July 2, 2012

Court Discusses Mental Hygine Act

by Stephen Bilkis

The petitioner of the case is the State of New York. The respondent of the case is P.H. This case is being heard by Judge Daniel P. Conviser.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said the respondent, P.H., is a sex offender and this case involves the civil management petition that has been filed, pursuant to the mental hygiene law. A hearing was conducted on the 22nd of September, 2008 to determine whether or not probable cause existed in the case to believe the respondent was in need of civil management as set by the Mental Hygiene Law section 10.06.

The petitioner called one witness during the hearing, Dr. Erika Frances. The court determined her testimony to be credible in the matter. There were no witnesses called by the respondent of the case.

Published on: July 2, 2012

Murder Charge Brings Up Estate Issues

by Stephen Bilkis

This case involves the accounting done by Dennis Gleason as the acting Executor of the Estate of Dianne Edwards who is deceased. The case is being presented in the Surrogate Court of Suffolk County.

This is a motion to dismiss the objections that have been filed in regard to the account of the estate fiduciary and a cross motion by the objectant for a summary judgment to be granted to dismiss the complaint.

Case Background

Published on: June 30, 2012

Supreme Court Discusses Date Rape

by Stephen Bilkis

On February 18, 1992, The Supreme Court for New York County, New York, discussed the application of punitive damages in civil suits against criminally convicted perpetrators would be appropriate in rape cases. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the case in question granted $10,000,000.00 in damages to the victim of a sexual assault in 1988. Her attacker was charged and convicted of rape, sodomy, and sexual abuse. The victim subsequently filed a civil suit to recover damages. The victim was a fashion model who relied on her unblemished physical beauty for her source of income. During the course of the rape, her attacker had slashed her with a knife. The slashing made it impossible for her to continue gainful employment as a model.

The 1991 amendment to the Civil Rights Law § 50-b demands that all victims of sex offenses regardless of their age be protected from having their identities disclosed to the public. The reason that rape victims identities require protection from disclosure is associated with the societal stigma that is placed on victims of sexual assault in general. This is especially true in the case of date rape. Date rape which is sometimes called acquaintance rape, is the most common form of rape in this country. Most cases of date rape go unreported. Prior to 1974, a rape victim had to have corroboration in the form of an eye witness or physical evidence to substantiate her claim of rape. That created an atmosphere of danger for any woman who was alone with a man. The court recognizes that date rape is a crime so old that it is recorded in the bible. For many years, if a woman willingly went to a man’s apartment or bedroom, the general opinion was that she knew that she would be expected to have sex with that man. If she then told him that she did not want to have sex with him and he forced her to have sex, society had the view that she had asked for it. She was considered to have known what she was getting into when she agreed to be alone with a man in an area that “good” girls did not go.

In 1988, mainly as a result of a book about it, date rape was put into the spot light. Many women reported during a comprehensive study to have suffered from forced sexual intercourse by dates. In fact, a staggering 20% of college students reported in 1985 that a date had forced them to have sexual intercourse against their will at least once. Many women did not even call forced sex on a date, rape. The FBI estimated that in 1988 60 to 80% of the women who were raped, were raped while on a date with their attacker. It was not until 1991, when the Violence Against Women Act was proposed that these issues were brought to the forefront of criticism in American public view. These proposed laws would make federal penalties available for rape prosecutions and require mandatory restitution to the victims.

Published on: June 30, 2012

Court Discusses Rape Trauma Syndrome

by Stephen Bilkis

Offenses of rape and other sex crimes are clouded by myths that pervade most societies about the causes of rape. For many hundreds of years, the cause of rape was believed to be an overwhelming sexual desire. It has only been in recent years that American society has taken the view that rape is an act of violence against women. When it involves a child, the manner in which the assault affects the child can be even more confusing. One example of this type of confusion occurred in a case that happened in Brooklyn, New York in the early 1980’s.

An eleven year old girl often went to her neighbor’s apartment to play and babysit the neighbor’s smaller children. On one date when she was caring for the children, the neighbor’s boyfriend came home. He was alone with the children for several hours. The eleven year old girl later claimed that the boyfriend had raped her. The rape was not reported until two months later, when the girl told her mother that the boyfriend had come home early again. The second time, she stated that he had kissed her on the mouth and fondled her breasts and bottom. The mother immediately took the girl to the hospital and filed a police report. The doctor’s report substantiated that the girl’s hymen was ruptured. The police arrested the neighbor’s boyfriend for raping the girl.

In the months between the rape and the trial, the little girl was overwhelmed with the situation and wrote several letters to her accused attacker. These letters stated that she was sorry and that she knew that it was not rape. The prosecutor, upon learning of these letters and that the defense intended to use them to impeach the credibility of the child, filed a motion with the court to be allowed to introduce evidence on the effects of rape trauma syndrome. The defense objected to the introduction of this evidence because they claim that the average juror is capable of distinguishing the effects of rape for themselves.

Published on: June 30, 2012

Court Discusses Changes in Law for Rape Charges

by Stephen Bilkis

Prior to 1974, a rape conviction was not able to be obtained on the uncorroborated testimony of the victim. In order to corroborate a testimony, the victim would have to be able to produce an eye witness or some other type of physical evidence. Prior to 1974, there was no such thing as DNA evidence. The ability to obtain a conviction on rape would be almost impossible. There is rarely an eyewitness to testify on behalf of a rape victim.

In fact, in 1967, rape was a misdemeanor offense. Rape in the present day is considered a felony offense. Attitudes have changed dramatically concerning sexual offenses. It seems incomprehensible in the present day that a rape conviction would require an eye witness or other physical evidence in order to get a conviction. However, even in 1967, some prosecutors were aware that the legislature needed to create changes in the laws to make them equitable to societal attitudes of the time. In fact, in one rape case the defendant was charged with assault in the second degree with the intent to rape and assault in the third degree. The defendant testified that he had completed the rape. The reason that he chose to testify to the completed rape was because a completed rape required eye witness testimony or other corroborating evidence. The offense of attempted rape or assault with the intent to rape, did not require the addition of corroborating evidence.

The defendant appealed the conviction because he contended that the prosecution was attempting to circumvent the requirement of corroborating evidence in rape cases by charging a crime that does not require corroboration. The court reviewed the case and determined that the fact that a prosecutor could conceivably circumvent the requirement of corroboration by charging a lesser included offense would result in a sentence that is greater for the lesser offense than it was for the completion of the rape.

Published on: June 30, 2012

Court Looks at Defendant’s Intent in Rape Charges

by Stephen Bilkis

On March 25, 1991 The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department in New York heard an appeal on a case of murder associated with an attempted rape. The elements of the offense are seemingly so bizarre as to warrant mention. The offender was originally convicted on May 10, 1984, with second degree murder, manslaughter in the second degree, and attempted rape in the first degree.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said he offender in this case stated that he knew the victim because he spent a good deal of time at her parents’ house. He fantasized about the victim repeatedly and became obsessed with the idea of having sex with her. Since, he knew that she would never allow him to have sex with her, he fantasized about raping her. He devised a plan to attack her and force her to have sex with him. He waited in her family home for her to come home and get into the shower. He went up the stairs and hid outside the master bedroom. He picked up a shillelagh, which is a type of knuckled walking stick. When she came out of the shower, he hit her on the head with the shillelagh. However, rather than forcing himself upon her, he became overwhelmed with the act of clubbing her. Her clubbed her repeatedly as she lay on the floor of her parents’ bedroom. He beat her until she was unconscious and covered with blood. He confessed in court to his crime.

He described to the court and the jury that he had intended to rape the victim, but once she was battered and covered with blood, he stopped. The offender filed an appeal with the Supreme court to overturn his verdict of guild to the attempted rape because the code section states that the man would be guilty of rape in the first degree if he had sexual intercourse by forcible compulsion. In order to attempt to rape, he would have had to attempt some action that would tend to further the commission of the rape. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the offender states that once he began to club the victim, he changed his mind about raping her and that none of his actions were in the effect of a rape. He contends that since the murder itself became the offense that any offense that is connected with rape should be overturned because there were no actions taken in the furtherance of that crime.

Published on: June 29, 2012

Court Discusses Corroboration Element of Sex Offenses

by Stephen Bilkis

A man was arrested and charged with the offenses of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree and possession of a dangerous weapon. The offenses were allegedly committed recently after the arrest. In addition, the grand jury failed to indict the man for the rape and sodomy charges, on the ground that there was no corroboration of the complainant’s testimony as to the intercourse, but directed that information be filed on the weapons charge. The information on the possession of a dangerous weapons charge was then filed.

The man however moves to dismiss the information on the ground that the offense of possession of a dangerous weapon requires intent to use unlawfully and the only proof of unlawful intent would be the complainant’s testimony that she was raped. Since there can be no conviction for the allege offense due to lack of corroboration, the man contends that the testimony of the complainant cannot now be used to convict him of the weapons charge.

In order for the court to address itself to the man’s contention, a brief recapitulation of the legislative history of laws pertaining to corroboration is required. However, the court of appeals subsequently overruled the line of cases and held that convictions for the crimes of attempted rape, assault and other offenses related to the offense could not be sustained where the only evidence against the opponent was the uncorroborated testimony that a consummated rape had occurred. Moreover, the reasoning of the court of appeals in the various cases was that the only testimony implicating the man in the non-rape charges was testimony of an actual rape.

Published on: June 28, 2012

Court Discusses Crime of Rape in the Third Degree

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

Defendant was charged with robbery, larceny, assault (two counts), endangering the welfare of a child, and sexual abuse in the third degree; a six-count indictment on criminal law violations.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said these the crimes were allegedly committed on 26 September 1967, the prosecution was under the new Penal Law, which was enacted in 1965, effective as of 1 September 1967.

Published on: June 28, 2012

Rape Trauma Syndrome Discussed by Appellate Court

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

On 10 September 1988, the victim, a married college professor, was driving from her home to a family wedding when, at about 7:30 P.M., she was stopped on the Northway by defendant, then a uniformed State Trooper. At defendant’s request, she gave him her license and registration. Defendant told her she was driving erratically and had failed to signal a lane change properly. He instructed her to leave her car, walk a straight line, and then enter the passenger seat of the patrol car, where he told her she could be in serious trouble, including DWI charges, and would have to blow in his face as a sobriety test. While she was doing this a second time, at defendant’s behest, he put his mouth on hers, began fondling her, and told her he was going to make it or do it with her, but first had to go to State Police barracks for a condom. The victim followed defendant to the barracks in her own car, though he retained her license and registration. She testified that she remained terrified throughout this entire period believing that, with defendant armed, any escape attempt in an unfamiliar area would be futile and even fatal.

At the barracks, defendant placed the victim in the police car, instructing her to remain there while he went inside. She testified that she was still frozen with fear, not knowing whether defendant had friends in the barracks who knew what he was doing. On his return, they drove off while the victim, believing it vital to her safety, engaged defendant in conversation. When they reached a secluded area, defendant, still armed, sexually attacked her. He thereafter returned with her to the barracks and allowed her to proceed to her destination, where she explained to the wedding guests that she was late because of a car trouble. On her return home, after being unable to eat or sleep for two days, and overcoming her fear that defendant would harm her, the victim contacted a local rape crisis center, which ultimately led to a report to the State Police, an investigation, and defendant’s arrest.