Defendant Files Motion for Inspection of Grand Jury Minutes
A Queens Grand Larceny Lawyer said that, this is a motion by the defendant for an inspection of the Grand Jury minutes, or in the alternative for an order dismissing the indictment. He contends that the testimony adduced before the Grand Jury did not spell out the crime charged against him and that illegal and improper evidence was produced before the Grand Jury. The indictment contains three counts; however, the defendant is charged only with the third count which alleges that he and his co-defendant conspired to commit the crime of grand larceny.
A Queens Criminal Lawyer said that, the defendant contends that the testimony heard by the Grand Jury caused that body to be ‘left to speculate the value of his’ report and medical bill in the amount of $95.00 and the effect thereof, if any, upon the award of $850.00 for the personal injury aspect of the claim’; that ‘there is no evidence from which the Grand Jury could conclude that the purportedly exaggerated medical bill and report had the effect of increasing the award to the extent that a felony would be accomplished’ and that ‘this was sheer speculation on its part.’
Defendant Moves to Dimiss Indictment Arguing Charges are Unconstitutional
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.
Defendant Claims Facial Insufficiency for Child Endangerment Charges
The defendant was charged with endangering the welfare of a child and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree. She now moves the Court for an order dismissing the charge of endangering the welfare of a child for facial insufficiency.
A Queens County Criminal attorney said that an accusatory instrument upon which the defendant may be held for trial “must allege facts of an evidentiary character’ demonstrating reasonable cause to believe that the defendant committed the crime charged.” Further, valid criminal court information must contain non-hearsay factual allegations which, if true, “establish every element of the offense charged and the defendant’s commission thereof.” CPL §100.40(1)(c).
Court Discusses Crimes Prior to an Arrest
Court Discusses Whether Defendant Was Deprived of a Fair Trial
People v. Garcia
The Court Discusses Whether the defendant was deprived of a fair trial because the Prosecution’s Cross-examination
New York Appellate Court Decides Case Regarding Due Process
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.
Court Discusses Gap in the Chain of Custody
People v. Rivera
New York Appellate Court Denies Summary Judgment Motion
This proceeding involves a motion by Westchester Medical Center for summary judgment upon Progressive Casualty Insurance Company’s failure to either pay the Hospital’s no-fault benefits or deny its claim within 30 days as required by Insurance Law § 5106(a).
The court denies the motion.