New York City

Published on: April 9, 2012

Defendant Raises Question Over Use of Breathalyzer Tests Admitted as Evidence in DUI Case

by Stephen Bilkis

In January of 2005, a man received two moving violations: one for speeding and one for a New York DWI. Because a New York DWI is a criminal violation, the man was not only ticketed but also arrested and faced criminal charges. There were two officers involved in the interaction with the man: an arresting officer and a law enforcement officer who administered a breathalyzer test to determine his blood alcohol content.

According to evidence presented at a subsequent trial before a judge, the arresting officer testified that the man was driving east on Route 404 in Webster, NY at around 2:03 in the morning on the night of the alleged New York DWI. The arresting officer noticed the man was driving too fast and his radar gun subsequently revealed that the man was driving 55 miles per hour in a 40 MPH zone.

Published on: March 26, 2012

Plaintiff Challenges Domestic Violence Prevention Act in New York Court

by Stephen Bilkis

On April 18, 2007, police responded to a home in Queens, New York. What they found there was a horror. Four bodies were found dead in the home. One was an elderly woman. A second was the companion of the woman. The third was a home health care worker assigned to the woman. The fourth was the twenty year old son of the woman, he had killed himself. Evidence at the scene revealed that he had first killed his mother, then her companion and the home health care worker, and then he had killed himself. The woman was survived by another younger son who had not yet reached the age of consent.

In May of 2008, the surviving son filed a complaint alleging wrongful death in the case of his mother. It also alleged infliction of emotional distress, negligent supervision and gross negligence on behalf of the New York City Police Department. By May 20th the court had denied all of the child’s claims, which were made through his father, on the grounds that the time limit to file such claims had expired. The only remaining claim is that of criminal wrongful death.

Published on: March 25, 2012

Wife Files Domestic Violence Charges Against Spouse in New York Criminal Court

by Stephen Bilkis

In a classic case of domestic violence, the victim, usually the wife of the perpetrator, is afraid of the consequences when she decides to file a case against her husband and her husband is convicted.

A 35-year old man was charged with the crimes of assault and coercion. According to sources, the charge arises out of an incident that occurred at dawn one July day. The sources said that the husband punched his wife in the ribs causing laceration to her spleen and requiring hospitalization in intensive care and medical treatment. The wife added that her husband took her cell phone and tore the telephone line for her cordless phone off the wall to prevent her from calling 911.

Published on: March 22, 2012

Government Agency Files Negligence Case Against Mother in Domestic Violence Case

by Stephen Bilkis

Children often become the direct victims of domestic violence. Oftentimes, being exposed to domestic violence leads to the child being mentally or emotionally impaired. Oftentimes, in a sad twist of fate, an act of reckless violence results to the death of an innocent child.

In this case, a government agency filed a negligence case against a mother of two minors. The two children were Ravern H., aged 18 months, and Kelly S. Ravern, aged six weeks. The government agency found that the children are neglected children and removed them from the mother’s care for a period of 12 months.

Published on: March 21, 2012

New York Court of Appeals Discusses Penal Law 70.70

by Stephen Bilkis

Courts, judges, and juries decide cases based on what the law says. But what if the law seems to be saying two different things? And what if the law in two states are different? Which one should be followed? An expert discusses a most interesting case that answers these two questions.

Malik Y or Yusuf M was convicted of Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Third Degree, Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fourth Degree, and Criminally Using Drug Paraphernalia in the Second Degree.

Published on: March 19, 2012

A New York Man, Bennie H, found himself facing additional charges

by Stephen Bilkis

A New York Man, Bennie H, found himself facing additional charges following his arrest for possession and sale of a controlled substance in 2004. It seems that he had been arrested in North Carolina previously for robbery. The previous conviction made his current charges considerably more serious because under New York law, the previous felony conviction increased the seriousness of his current charges. Mr. H’s potential jail sentence had been increased on both of his charges. Mr. H decided to fight the increased sentencing by requesting that the courts evaluate the use of the North Carolina robbery conviction.

Mr. H argued that since the laws were substantially different between New York and North Carolina that the conviction for robbery in North Carolina did not meet the elements of the crime in New York. If this was the case, then Mr. H did not have a previous felony charge and the increased seriousness of the current charges against him would be invalid.

Published on: March 18, 2012

What does kidnapping really mean?

by Stephen Bilkis

What does kidnapping really mean? Is there a difference in the law’s treatment of a kidnapping and a kidnapping done as part of another crime? In this case, a New York Robbery Lawyer discusses how the law treats the two differently.

William G was charged with robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the third degree, and kidnapping in the second degree. He was found innocent of all except the kidnapping charge. He appealed that the verdict was unfair and so the case was brought to a higher court. The Court of Appeals agreed and reversed the judgment. On what basis? Let’s review the facts.

Published on: March 17, 2012

David M was charged with 1st degree robbery and put on trial.

by Stephen Bilkis

A source tells of a case in Albany County where the judges came up with different decisions because of their differing perspectives on how double jeopardy applied to a situation.

David M was charged with 1st degree criminal robbery and put on trial. According to our expert, 1st degree robbery is robbery using a deadly weapon. During the trial, there was no evidence to prove that M was armed with the knife that he allegedly used. Therefore, he appealed to the Court to drop the charge. The Court did not. However, it said that it would open to the jury the possibility that M was guilty only of 2nd degree and 3rd degree robbery. These are lesser offenses with lighter sentences. The jury however still could not decide if M was guilty of these.

Published on: March 15, 2012

In some trials, there are more than one judge who comes up with the verdict

by Stephen Bilkis

In some trials, there are more than one judge who comes up with the verdict. Have you ever wondered what would happen if not all the judges agreed on a decision? A source tells of one such case.

Frank A was charged with robbery and illegal possession of a weapon for two incidents. The first was the robbery of Mark J on December 27, 1981 in the City of Buffalo. The second was for the robbery of William . Both robberies happened at around the same time and in the same area.

Published on: March 13, 2012

Court cases are very interesting in that the verdicts that the courts come up with for similar situations can be very different

by Stephen Bilkis

Court cases are very interesting in that the verdicts that the courts come up with for similar situations can be very different. Our source tells of one case where a pair of men robbed someone but were given different sentences.

In September 2, 2004, Frank M was found guilty by the Trial Court of 2nd degree robbery. His alleged accomplice, S, was charged with 3rd degree robbery. M appealed to the Court of Appeals for a review of the sentence. He found it unfair that he would receive a heavier sentence than S when they were both charged with the same crime.