New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

Published on: July 8, 2012

Defendant Claims Evidence was Prejudicial

by Stephen Bilkis

This case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department, Appellate Division. The respondent for the case is the People of the State of New York. The appellant of the case is Abu Khan. The People of the State of New York are represented by Gary Fidel and Jill A Gross-Marks for counsel from the Richard A Brown, District Attorney for Kew Gardens New York, office. The appellant is represented by the law offices of Lynn W. L. Fahey with Jonathan M. Kratter for counsel.

A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said the defendant is appealing a judgment that was made by the Queens County Supreme Court on the 24th of July, 2007. The judgment found the defendant guilty of rape in the first degree, endangerment of the welfare of a child, sexual conduct against a child, and second degree sexual abuse.

Case Background

Published on: July 8, 2012

Defendant Brings Motion to Bring In Expert Testimony

by Stephen Bilkis

This case involves the People of the State of New York versus the defendant Quentin Abney. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York located in New York County.

Case Background

The defendant has been convicted by a jury for the crime of holding a six inch knife to the throat of a girl who was thirteen years old at the time and ripping a chain from around her neck. A the only witness in the crime was the victim. The incident only lasted a few seconds. There was no evidence submitted in the case aside from the victim’s identification of the defendant.

Published on: July 8, 2012

Defendant Contends 6th Amendment Rights Were Violated During Trial

by Stephen Bilkis

This is an appeal case. The case is being heard in the Second Department, Appellate Division, of the Supreme court of the State of New York. The respondent in the case is the People of the State of New York. The appellant of the case is Jean Cantave. The People of the State of New York are represented by John M. Castellano, Roni C. Piplani, and Sharon Y. Brodt from the District Attorneys office in Kew Gardens New York. The appellant is represented by the law offices of Lynn W.L. Fahey of New York, New York with De Nice Powell for counsel.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said the defendant is appealing an order that was made by the Queens County Supreme Court. The order was issued on the 28th of June, 2008 and convicted the defendant of first degree rape and first degree sexual abuse.

Case Background

Published on: July 8, 2012

Court Assesses SORA Statute in Sex Crimes Case

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts:

The defendant appeared before the Court for a risk level determination pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act. The defendant has a criminal history which dates back to the 1950’s and includes a number of crimes committed in Virginia, viz: Rape in Virginia, in 1955; Felony Cutting with Intent to Maim in Virginia, in 1957; Rape in 1962; and Arson in the Second Degree in New York, in 1985.

First, A New York Sex Crimes Lawyer said the defendant moved to have the Court declare SORA unconstitutional as applied and use the Static 99 rather than the SORA Risk Assessment Instrument (the “RAI”) to determine his risk for re-offense. He argues that the SORA Risk Assessment Instrument does not measure the risk of re-offense, as it purports to do, but reflects a moral judgment about how blameworthy sexually offending behavior is. He describes the instrument and risk level determinations under SORA as punitive rather than regulatory. For this reason, he alleges, the statute is unconstitutional.

Published on: July 8, 2012

Model Survives Brutal Attack

by Stephen Bilkis

A female model dated an acquaintance. They had dinner and after-dinner conversation. The male acquaintance then started making advances of a sexual nature and the female model refused.

The male acquaintance got angry at being refused. He pulled out a five inch knife and threatened to cut the female model’s face. The female model became fearful not only for her life but also for her future as her face is something of a business asset from which she derived her living.

The male acquaintance raped and sodomized her for two hours. He cut up her clothes and also cut her up in her arms and legs during that time. The female model was hospitalized. She was traumatized and suffered anguish and emotional distress. She underwent therapy for her to deal with the fears, the nightmares and the depression which resulted from the rape.

Published on: July 8, 2012

Defendant Uses Failure to Report Rape as a Defense

by Stephen Bilkis

Two women were hired, one after the other, as data entry technicians for a company that manufactures, markets and directly ships children’s clothing and accessories. Both women were immigrants from Russia without relatives or connections in the United States. Both complained of sexual harassment, sexual assault and sexual abuse from a high-level manager of the children’s clothing company where they were employed.

The first data entry technician was initially hired in February 2005 on a temporary basis upon a referral from a technical employment agency. She was paid the rate of $15 hourly which was later raised to $20 hourly when she was hired on a permanent basis after two weeks. She worked at the children’s clothing company for only two months before she was forced to resign due to intolerable working conditions at the clothing company.

She claims that on her second day at the job, the manager ran his fingers through her hair. At another time, the manager asked her to stay late and when they were alone, he asked her personal questions as to whether she had a boyfriend and actually asked her to have sex with him.

Published on: July 8, 2012

Defendant Contends Duress and Misrepresentation by Court

by Stephen Bilkis

In an action of unjust conviction against the state, claimant entered a plea of guilty to the reduced charge of attempted rape in the first degree in satisfaction of indictment, charging him with rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said three weeks after it was entered, claimant moved to vacate his plea on the ground that it “was involuntary and was taken only because of the enormous pressure put upon him by former legal aid counsel and his supervisor from the legal aid society.” The supporting affidavit further alleges that, from the outset, claimant had told his Legal Aid attorney, “I did not want to hear from him about taken a plea that I believed my innocence could and would be proven in court.” Claimant describes the performance of his attorneys as coercive and also ineffective, and asserts that counsel should have withdrawn from claimant’s defense. Significantly, the affidavit makes no mention of any coercion on the part of the court.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said that, respondent Britt’s portrayal of events in general, and particularly those surrounding the entry of his guilty plea, is distorted and self-serving. An examination of the circumstances culminating in the motion to vacate his plea demonstrates that claimant’s allegations of coercion, ineffective representation and unfair surprise are contradicted by the record.

Published on: July 7, 2012

Defendant Contends Error in Trial

by Stephen Bilkis

Judges Peter B. Skelos, J.P., Ruth C. Balkin, Joseph Covello, and Sandra L. Sgroi, JJ are overseeing this case that is being heard in the Second Judicial Department, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

The People of the State of New York are the respondents in the case. The appellant in the case is Luis Gomez. The People are represented by Sharon Y. Brodt and John M. Castellano from the District Attorney’s office of Kew Gardens, New York. The appellant is represented by Rober DiDio from Kew Gardens.

A New York DWI Lawyer said the defendant is appealing a judgment that was made by the Queens County Supreme Court on the 11th of January, 2008. The judgment found the defendant guilty of rape and course of sexual conduct against a child both in the second degree, first degree sexual abuse, and endangering the welfare of a child.

Published on: July 7, 2012

Court Looks at Issue of Consent

by Stephen Bilkis

This case deals with the matter of Seasia D., Mr. Anonymous et al as the appellants. The respondent in the matter is Kareem W. A non-party appellant in the case is Tenisha D. The case is being held in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department, Appellate Division.

This case deals with an adoption proceeding. Mr. and Mrs. Anonymous were the prospective adoptive parents. Tenisha D. is the birth mother and nonparty appellant. Mr. and Mrs. Anonymous, Tenisha D. and Family Focus Adoption Services are appealing an order that was made in the Family Court of Queens County. The order in question was made on the 30th of June and denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding after a hearing was held.

Case Background

Published on: July 7, 2012

Completing Criminal Act Not Necessary if Intent Present

by Stephen Bilkis

This case involves the People of the State of New York against the defendant Gerard Rollino. The case is being heard in the Criminal Term of the Supreme Court of the State of New York located in Queens County. Judge Irwin Shapiro is hearing the case.

A a New York Sex Crimes Lawyer said at the end of a trial without a jury the defendant was charged through an indictment for second degree Grand Larceny. The defendant has moved for a dismissal in the case. The question before the court is whether or not a would be thief is guilty of attempted or consummated larceny when the property in question is given to the person with the consent of the owner by a pre-arrangement with the police by one of their agents to supply a basis for the criminal prosecution.

Case History