Published on:

by

The People of the State of New York are the plaintiffs in this case. The defendant of the case is Anthony Sumpter. The case is being heard in the Criminal Court of the city of New York located in Queens County. Judge Sheryl L. Parker is overseeing the case.

The defendant has been charged with a felony complaint of second degree rape and endangering the welfare of a child. The defendant entered a plea bargain and he pled guilty to attempted rape in the third degree. He was sentenced to six months in jail.

In cases such as this it is required by law that the defendant be assessed using a Risk Assessment Instrument to determine the risk of reoffending. The defendant was found to be a level two or a moderate risk for reoffending. The defendant is challenging this assessment.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

The People of the State of New York are the appellants in this case. The respondent of the case is George Eiffel. The case is being heard in the Second Department Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The appellant is represented by the Kew Gardens District Attorney Office with Andrew Zuckerman and Michael O’Brien for counsel. The respondent is represented by the law office of Robert M. Baum with Michele Maxian and Susan L. Hendricks for counsel. The judges overseeing the case are Bracken J.P., Eiber, Lawrence, and Santucci, JJ.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said he People of the State of New York are appealing an order that was made in the Queens County Supreme Court that is dated the 29th of November, 1991. The ruling from the Queens County Supreme Court allowed the defendant to reduce the charges of bail jumping in the first degree to bail jumping in the third degree.

Court Discussion and Decision

Continue reading

Published on:

by

This is a case being heard in the Criminal Term of the Queens County Supreme Court of the State of New York. The case involves the People of the State of New York against the defendant Andre D. Miller. Judge David Goldstein is overseeing the case.

The issue at hand is whether or not the loss of a rape kit, either by the police or a hospital, requires a sanction to be imposed.

Case Background

Continue reading

by
Posted in: , and
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

This is a matter dealing with the anonymous respondent, Trevon Y. and the appellant the Presentment Agency. The case is being heard in the Second Department, Appellate Division, of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The Judges hearing the case are Mark C. Dillon, J.P., Ariel E. Belen, Ruth C. Balkin, and Leonard B. Austin, JJ.

The Presentment Agency is appealing a juvenile proceeding which took place in the Family Court of Queens County. The original order from the Queens County Family Court is dated the 27th of April, 2010 and dismissed the original petition of the case with prejudice.

Case Background

Continue reading

Published on:

by

The People of the State of New York are the plaintiffs of the case. The defendant in the matter is Joon Ho Chin. The case is being heard by Judge Randall T. Eng.

The defendant is using the doctrine for collateral estoppel in this particular case. The defendant, Joon Ho Chin, moves to preclude the plaintiff, the People of the State of New York, from introducing evidence that he used physical force in the alleged rape against the complainant of the case.

Case History

Continue reading

Published on:

by

This case is being heard in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department. The matter involves the attorneys Seymour S. Detsky and Herbert S. Kassner, who are also the respondents in the case. The petitioners in the case are Michael A. Gentile and Jeremiah B. McKenna.

The petitioners of this case, Michael A. Gentile and Jeremiah B. McKenna were directed to act as counsel and investigate the existence of unethical and improper practices engaged in by the respondent attorneys. The improper practices include representing sexually oriented enterprises.

A New York DWI Lawyer said the petitioners have moved to confirm the order that was made by Referee Frank J. McNabb that recommends charges that were made against Herbert S. Kassner are dismissed. It is also recommended that respondent Seymour S. Detsky should be disbarred. This report was referred to the court by a Notice of Motion made by the petitioner and dated the 30th of December, 1982.

Continue reading

by
Posted in: , and
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

This is a case for appeal. The respondent in the case is the People of the State of New York. The appellant of the case is Jay Jomar Bradshaw. The case is being heard in the Second Judicial Department in the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

Jay Jomar Bradshaw, the appellant, is appealing a judgment that was made by the Supreme Court of Kings County. A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said the judgment convicted Bradshaw of rape in the first degree. He pled guilty in the case. The appeal is to suppress identification testimony that was made in the case.

Case Background

Continue reading

Published on:

by

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.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

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

Continue reading

Contact Information