Criminal Proceedure

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.

Published on: March 12, 2012

There is no better way to learn a lot with the legal proceedings of robbery cases but by going through cases

by Stephen Bilkis

There is no better way to learn a lot with the legal proceedings of robbery cases but by going through cases that an expert has handled in the past. This goes the same for this robbery case of Walter J which happened last October 8, 1978. He was arrested by two police officers when the two received recent reports that there has been stolen automobile on the loose within the vicinity. When J went out of the car, he was holding a jacket whose pockets were filled with a lot of items that you would surely think have been just stolen.

According to the data taken by the observer, J was brought to the nearest precinct and was given the usual Miranda warnings to which he responded, “I understand.” With the rest of warning, he just consistently said that he decides not to say anything. According to the officer, the questioning lasted for about 30 minutes. When the second officer came around and administered the same questioning, the accused only responded with this statement: “I don’t want to talk to you.” The suspects were then transferred to another precinct, where the officers who brought them there testified that they are unsure already if the two were once again, questioned upon arrival.

Published on: March 10, 2012

It is common for a lot of robbery cases to be accompanied with a crime of murder

by Stephen Bilkis

It is common for a lot of robbery cases to be accompanied with a crime of murder. It is truly devastating to learn from a competent observer how numerous criminal cases such as this bombard the neighborhood of New York. A case that can serve as a good example for you to further understand how brutal robbery cases can turn out to be is the case of Jesus P. The victim, George G was on his way to his apartment building after seeing a movie, was approached by Jesus P with Robert F.

According to the details gathered by a study, the two suspects approached G to ask whether he lives in the building. But before he could even answer, he was already thrusted with a knife by P which was handed by F. Refusing to surrender, P did not stop pushing on the weight of the knife to further hurt the victim. When they found out that it was only a few dollars that they can get from G, they decided to let him go and leave with the money. But G was still stabbed the second time before he was totally let free.