Queens Rape 12
The People of the State of New York are the appellants in this case. The respondent of the case is Jay Jomar Bradshaw. The case is being heard in the Court of Appeals in New York.
Case Summary
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
Queens Rape 10
A New York Sex Crimes Lawyer said this case involves the People of the State of New York versus the defendant George Barrow. The case is being heard in the Criminal Term of the Supreme Court of the State of New York in Queens County. Justice J. Irwin Shapiro is hearing the case.
In an answer to an indictment that accused him of felonious possession of a knife for use as a dangerous weapon, the defendant pleads that he is not guilty. He is motioning for an order to amend his prior plea to one of not guilty based on the reason of a former conviction and by an order for inspection of the Grand Jury minutes. Alternatively, he moves to have the indictment dismissed on the grounds of Double Jeopardy.
The People of the State of New York are the respondents of this case. Eric Maier is the appellant of the case. The case is being heard in the Second Department, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
A New York Criminal Lawyer said the defendant is appealing a judgment that was issued from the County Court of Suffolk County. The judgment convicts the defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree. He is also convicted of failing to stop at a stop sign. The conviction was made by a jury.
Case Background
The respondent for this particular case is the People of the State of New York. The appellant of the case is Robert J. Wofford. The case is being heard in the Second Department, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court.
The defendant is appealing a judgment that was made by the Kings County Supreme Court. The judgment was made during a nonjury trial and the defendant was convicted of murder and possession of weapons. He was charged with a misdemeanor and is now serving a 20 years to life sentence for the murder charge.
Case Facts
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.
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
This is an appeal case. The appellant is Stephen S. Lavalle. The respondent for the case is the People of the State of New York. The case is being heard in the Court of Appeals of the state of New York.
A New York Sex Crimes Lawyer said Stephen S. Lavalle, the appellant, was found guilty of first degree murder in the course of a first degree rape by a jury in Suffolk County. Lavalle has received a death sentence for these crimes. He is appealing the death penalty.
Case Background and Facts
The people of the state of New York are the respondents in this particular case. The appellant in the case is Jessie Dunn. The case is being heard in the Fourth Department, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court.
This case for appeal deals with the question of whether the rights of the defendant were violated under the fourth amendment of the constitution.
Case Background
Suffolk Drug Crime 87
The petitioner in the case is James Kenneth Brown III. The matter deals with an application for a judgment that is pursuant to the Civil Practice Law and Rules, Article 78. The respondents of the case are Andrea D. Evans, the Chief Executive Officer for the NYS Division of Parole and the Chairwoman of the NYS Board of Parole. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York located in the County of Franklin.
Legal Background
New York Criminal Lawyer Blog