Articles Posted in Drug Possession

Published on:

by

The defendant wanted his sentenced to be reduced according to the provisions indicated on newly amended Drug Reform Act. According to the defendant he will plead guilty to a drug crime of illegal possession of abused substances if the court will grant his request for reduced sentence.

The defendant supported his claim by declaring that the new amendments should cover all cases. This means that the new statutes should be recognized by the court as retroactive. The defendant committed his drug crime before the enactment date of the new provisions. The People opposed his request for coverage of the new sentencing guidelines. The court was tasked to determine if the defendant had legal basis for his request.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

The defendant in this case filed a motion to dismiss the charges against him. An issue was raised on whether the testimony presented during the trial came from an accomplice.

According to the defendant’s motion, if the testimony was based on the statements of his accomplice, the testimony itself should not be admissible in court for lack of support. The defendant further stated in his motion that if the testimony of the accomplice is not corroborated or supported by the statement of another witness, the evidence against him is not enough to prove anything.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

The court in this case was tasked to determine if the defendant should be allowed bail even if he was charged with a drug crime of illegal possession and sale of drugs. As for his sentence, the defendant was given an indeterminate sentence which means he could be sent to prison for year or for the rest of his life. The defendant claimed that he should be eligible for bail under the equal rights protection law.

Under the new provisions involving reduced sentencing of defendants with first class felonies or drug crimes, the defendant should be allowed bail because they are allowed to enjoy the right of equal protection of laws. The indeterminate sentence given by the court was based on the general sanctions provided by the law.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

On May 2, 1975, at around 4 am, a 21-year-old man along with three other men burglarized a New Rochelle home. The home was that of a man who was said to be a drug dealer. The dealer lived in the home with his wife and three daughters who were ages two, five, and seven at the time. The children were sleeping when the men broke into the home. The two younger girls were sleeping with their mother. The armed intruders wore masks and demanded money.

When the purported drug dealer said that he had no money, the intruders said that they were going to kill the children. When the purported drug dealer stated that he had no money, the intruders said that they were going to kill the children if he didn’t tell them where the money was. He still contended that he had no money. The men decided at that point that they would kidnap the two-year-old girl and hold her for ransom. The men took the mother into the bathroom and held a gun to her head and threatened to kill her if she did not tell them where the money was. She stated that she did not have any money and the men bound and gagged her. They locked her into a closet and kidnapped the two-year-old. The woman managed to get free and discovered that her baby had been taken.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

On May 24, 2011, a Kings County, New York man was arrested during the execution of a search warrant. The search warrant was the result of an undercover investigation that covered more than four months. On 13 separate occasions, undercover police officer’s observed the man in possession of heroin and in possession of cocaine. They also observed him sell heroin and cocaine on these occasions.

The case was referred to the Brooklyn Treatment Court on August 16, 2011. The man had requested to be considered for Judicial Diversion of his case. Judicial Diversion is a program that was designed for certain felony offenders spelled out in Criminal Procedure Law Article 216. It grants the judges authority to decide which nonviolent offenders have committed their offenses as a result of substance abuse or dependence. They are then given the opportunity to avoid a jail sentence by contracting with the state to complete a court monitored treatment program.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

On November 7, 1974, the Supreme Court of Monroe County, New York was called upon to hear the appeal of a drug possession conviction. A New York man was convicted after a jury trial of “Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the First Degree based on a $5000.00 sale of cocaine, Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Fifth Degree, and Criminally Using Drug Paraphernalia in the Second Degree.” The appeal of the offender’s cocaine possession and sale case was based on the contention by the offender that the state’s statute was written in violation of the United States Constitution.

The offender claims that the punishment imposed on Class A drug felons is cruel and unusual in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. The defendant argued that the sentences for drug offenses in New York are disproportionate to the offenses themselves. He sites in his behalf that other jurisdictions have lowered their mandated sentences when they were determined to be disproportionate. He contends that New York’s failure to do so makes them in violation of the United States Constitution.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

A 37-year old man has been indicted for the drug crimes sale of a controlled substance and heroin possession. Under the revised criminal laws relating to drug crimes, each of the crime charged is classified as an A–III felony, punishable by an indeterminate term of imprisonment, the minimum period of which, for a first offender, is from one to eight and one-third years, and the maximum of which is life imprisonment.

The accused demanded for the dismissal of his indictment based on constitutional grounds. The accused specifically assailed the validity of certain criminal laws on the ground that these provisions do violence to his due process and equal protection rights and that they are inconsistent with the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment under the Federal and New York Constitutions.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

He was 21 when he broke into a New Rochelle home on May 2, 1975. Assisted by three other men, Taylor entered the home of a suspected drug dealer with the intention of stealing money from the residents. Asleep in the home were the alleged drug dealer’s wife and three daughters, who were aged two, five and seven. The four men, who were armed and wearing masks, demanded money from the wife and threatened to kill the children when she stated she had none. After she repeated her claim that there was no money to steal, the men threatened to kidnap the youngest daughter and hold her for ransom.

One of the men took the girls’ mother into a bathroom just off the master bedroom and closed the door. While holding a gun to her head he told her he would kill her if she didn’t reveal where they hid their money. She was then tied, bound and locked in a closet. When she escaped, the men were gone, along with her two-year-old daughter. She called police, who arrived on the scene. An officer noticed a blue Datsun in the area, which was occupied by Taylor, another man and a little girl. Police attempted to stop the vehicle, which lead to a high-speed chase. Finally, the car collided with a light pole, allowing police to rescue the child and apprehend Mr. X and the other man.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

On October 11, 2007 an undercover detective from the Broome County Sheriff’s Office in New York was advised by a confidential informant that a man who went by the street name of “Ace” was selling cocaine. He provided the detective with a cell phone number of the man. The detective called the cell phone and made arrangements to meet with “Ace” for the purpose of buying some cocaine.

After getting off of the phone, the officer looked up all of the known drug dealers in the area that used the street name, “Ace.” There were three persons who were using that name. The detective went to the location that was agreed upon and “Ace” approached the passenger side of his car. He leaned in and exchanged a small “knotted wrap” baggy of cocaine for $50 cash from the detective. They had a short conversation and the dealer left. The drugs tested positive for cocaine.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

by

A 33-year old man was indicted by a jury and charged with marijuana possession. Court records showed that the defendant was a second felony offender but not a violent offender. During the course of plea negotiations, the defendant was offered by the State a plea to a B felony in satisfaction of the indictment with a minimum sentence of four and a half years to nine years in state prison. Prior to defendant’s plea, the New York State Legislature passed the Drug Law Reform Act, which was signed into law in 2004.

The People took the plea with a minimum sentence but the sole issue in contention is, what is the minimum state prison sentence now allowed by law given the passage of the new law.

Continue reading

by
Posted in:
Published on:
Updated:
Contact Information