Articles Posted in Drug Possession

Published on:

The defendant has been indicted for the commission of the crime of Criminally Selling a Dangerous Drug Possession in the Third Degree, a Class C Felony, in violation of the Penal Law § 220.35, and he now moves that the indictment then be dismissed.

A New York Criminal attorney said that the district attorney responds to the effect that the people have no scientific reports in their possession, but will provide such reports which may come into their possession in the future, and ask that the motion be denied without prejudice to a renewal at the time of trial under circumstances where the chain of evidence will not be interfered with.

Continue reading

Published on:

The defendant moves to dismiss the indictment against her claiming that the statutes upon which the charges are founded are unconstitutional. Defendant is alleged to have sold over an ounce of a substance containing methadone to an undercover officer. This alleged sale has given rise to the three charges contained in the indictment; one count relates to the alleged sale and the others to the defendant’s possession immediately prior to the sale.

A New York Criminal attorney said that the thrust of the defendant’s claim with respect to the use of the ‘aggregate weight’ of the substance possessed and sold as the basis for determining the degree of offense charged in the first and second counts is that it creates irrational distinctions between similar kinds of conduct and imposes unequal punishments upon offenders who have committed virtually identical illegal acts.

Continue reading

Published on:

Defendant was indicted and convicted after trial of the sale of two ounces, 33 grains of cocaine to an undercover police officer on August 1988. The trial testimony established that, in a known drug location, defendant sold the undercover officer 214 vials of cocaine for $2,000 and promised to “take care of” him “the next time” he came.

A New York Drug Possession Crime lawyer said that at the time of the sale she was 17 years old. Conviction of a class A-I felony carries a mandatory indeterminate prison sentence, the minimum of which is not less than 15 years and not more than 25 years, the maximum of which is life imprisonment. The trial court, however, determined that in defendant’s case, imposing even the minimum mandatory sentence of 15 years to life would constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The court, therefore, imposed an indeterminate sentence of eight years to life imprisonment. A divided Appellate Division affirmed, the dissenters voting to reverse the sentence and remand the case to Supreme Court for resentencing in compliance with the Penal Law’s mandatory sentencing provisions for an A-I felony conviction.

Continue reading

Published on:

The defendant was charged with one count of criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree and one count of criminal drug possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree. The defendant has moved for dismissal for facial insufficiency, for disclosure of the search warrant and related documents, and for invalidation of the search warrant and suppression of the physical evidence seized pursuant thereto.

A New York Drug crime attorney said that in April 2008, inside of 97th Street in New York County, 18 ziplock bags containing crack cocaine residue were recovered from a bedroom in “the defendant’s apartment” and a crack pipe and a strainer containing crack cocaine residue were recovered from another bedroom in “the defendant’s apartment.”

Continue reading

Published on:

In November 2005, the defendant entered a plea of not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect to the crime of Criminal Possession of a gun in the Second Degree, and to other related offenses. It was alleged that the defendant displayed a firearm while threatening to use it against the complainant, the defendant’s sister-in-law, and that said actions caused her fear of physical injury. A commitment order, pursuant to CPL 330.20[6], was issued and the defendant was remanded to the care and custody of the State Commissioner of Mental Health. The defendant was confined in a secure facility pursuant to CPL 330.20. After stipulation by the parties, as reflected in an Order, the defendant was found, although mentally ill, to no longer have a dangerous mental disorder. The defendant was subsequently transferred to a Psychiatric Center, a non-secure facility. Since the defendant has been in the custody of the Commissioner, several orders of retention have issued.3 The defendant is currently still a patient, and resident of the center.

A New York Drug Posssession lawyer said that the Commissioner has filed an application for a subsequent two- year retention order. The defendant is opposed to retention and is seeking his conditional release.

Continue reading

Published on:

This rebuttal evidence of prior crimes was received over the defendant’s objection and after an extended colloquy at which the People first urged that it was admissible on the issue of credibility. The defendant contended, however, that the People were bound by the defendant’s answers on cross-examination and could not introduce collateral evidence to impeach him. The People then urged that the defendant had sought to controvert his intent to sell–a material fact in the prosecution–by his bizarre testimony and that the evidence of uncharged crimes was admissible on rebuttal to disprove it. The court admitted the rebuttal evidence solely to impeach defendant’s credibility and he was convicted of criminal sale, possession with intent to sell, and drug possession.

The Appellate Division held that the only possible basis for admission of the evidence was to impeach the defendant’s credibility. The defendant’s denial that he ever sold drugs would not permit the prosecution to cross-examine the defendant about specific instances of alleged prior drug sales and to introduce, through extrinsic evidence, such prior sales. Two Judges dissents such holding and they contended that the evidence are not collateral evidence and are used only to impeach credibility, and it should have been received as evidence of guilt because the defendant had not merely denied guilt but had tried to prove a material fact in exoneration of the charge, that he had never sold drugs and did not intend to sell those in his possession in this instance. Before the court, the People contend the evidence of prior crimes was admissible as evidence of guilt and under the circumstances, properly received on rebuttal. The court reversed and reinstated the judgment of conviction.

Continue reading

Published on:

On a spring evening at around 6:30 P.M., a police officer and another police officer were parked in separate marked police vehicles on a residential street in Rochester. One of the officers noticed that a woman (later determined to be the defendant’s girlfriend) was standing in front of a house across the street from where he was parked and was videotaping his activities. Curious about the woman’s identity, the officer ran the license plate of a Cadillac that was parked in her driveway and discovered that the plate number had been issued for a Toyota – not a Cadillac. He briefly stepped out of his car to ask who owned the automobile and the woman responded that it was her grandfather’s vehicle. The officer then reentered his patrol car. A few minutes later, the defendant man approached the open passenger-side window of the officer’s car, leaned his head in and inquired why the officer had checked the license plate. The officer said something to the effect that he could run a plate if he wanted to.

The defendant man started backing away from the police vehicle towards the middle of the street, swearing at the officer. When the officer asked what he said, the defendant repeated the profanity and accused the officer of harassing him. After radioing his partner that he intended to make an arrest, the officer exited his vehicle and, with the assistance of his partner, placed the defendant under arrest. These activities apparently attracted the attention of various civilian bystanders and, by the time of the arrest, about ten people had congregated on the sidewalk behind the defendant and his girlfriend. In a search incident to arrest, the police discovered that the defendant was with 25 bags cocaine in his possession. The defendant man was subsequently indicted and charged with criminal possession of a controlled substance third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance fourth degree and disorderly conduct.

Continue reading

Published on:

The defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree and was sentenced to one year in jail. The defendant has moved to have the court set aside his sentence. A hearing on the defendant’s motion was held.

The court has presided over Manhattan Treatment Court (MTC) and Drug Treatment Alternative Program (D-TAP) cases since 1998. MTC is a drug treatment program administered by the court as an alternative to incarceration offered to drug possession addicted first time felony offenders which, if successfully completed, results in dismissal of the defendant’s case. Successful completion requires that the defendant be drug free for 12 months, follow the rules and regulations of MTC, and satisfactorily complete an independent drug treatment program. If a defendant fails to successfully complete the program, the defendant is sentenced to one year in jail. Toxicology tests are used by this court and treatment courts throughout the nation to monitor defendants. The defendants are rewarded when their toxicology tests are negative, indicating that they have maintained their sobriety and sanctioned when their toxicologies are positive, indicating that they have relapsed. The defendants entering MTC are told that they control their fate. The court tries to do everything in its power to assist the defendant to deal with his or her addiction. To that end MTC tries to individualize its treatment of the defendants while maintaining a series of graduated sanctions and rewards. The defendants know what is required of them to successfully complete treatment.

Continue reading

Contact Information