New York Criminal Lawyer Blog

The Manhattan based criminal defense law firm, Crotty Saland, LLP, is pleased to announce that Sports Illustrated Online and the Vault.Com have once again sought out one of our criminal defense attorney's insight regarding Plaxico Burress' gun possession case (Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree pursuant to New York Penal Law 265.03). Jeremy Saland, one of the criminal defense attorneys, drafted two articles for the Vault.Com regarding the Grand Jury proceeding in general as well as an analysis of Mr. Burress' decision to testify before that body. Moreover, CNNSI.Com utilized Mr. Saland's experience as a former Manhattan prosecutor and criminal defense attorney in their piece on Plaxico Burress as well.

Crotty Saland, LLP is a criminal defense firm representing clients throughout the NYC area for white collar and violent crimes. Started by two former Manhattan prosecutors, Crotty Saland, LLP utilizes the experience they have from both sides to zealously advocate for their clients, develop legal strategies and implement their clients' defenses.

In the even that you or a loved one is under investigation, arrested or charged with any crime, contact Crotty Saland, LLP.

Your family is looking for an experienced New York City criminal defense lawyer because you are alleged to have followed someone around for a few hours intimidating them. You threatened to strike someone with a bat and severely hurt them. Although shots were not fired, you threatened another person with a firearm and placed him in fear for his life. While each of these sets of facts may establish numerous crimes, all of them may establish some degree of Menacing in the First, Second or Third Degrees pursuant New York Penal Law 120.15, 120.14 and 120.13 as follows:

NY Penal Law § 120.15

A person is guilty of menacing in the third degree when, by physical menace, he or she intentionally places or attempts to place another person in fear of death, imminent serious physical injury or physical injury.

Menacing in the third degree is a class B misdemeanor.

Penal Law § 120.14

A person is guilty of menacing in the second degree when:

1. He or she intentionally places or attempts to place another person in reasonable fear of physical injury, serious physical injury or death by displaying a deadly weapon, dangerous instrument or what appears to be a pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun, machine gun or other firearm; or

2. He or she repeatedly follows a person or engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts over a period of time intentionally placing or attempting to place another person in reasonable fear of physical injury, serious physical injury or death; or

3. He or she commits the crime of menacing in the third degree in violation of that part of a duly served order of protection, or such order which the defendant has actual knowledge of because he or she was present in court when such order was issued, pursuant to article eight of the family court act, section 530.12 of the criminal procedure law, or an order of protection issued by a court of competent jurisdiction in another state, territorial or tribal jurisdiction, which directed the respondent or defendant to stay away from the person or persons on whose behalf the order was issued.

Menacing in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.

Penal Law § 120.13

A person is guilty of menacing in the first degree when he or she commits the crime of menacing in the second degree and has been previously convicted of the crime of menacing in the second degree or the crime of menacing a police officer or peace officer within the preceding ten years.

Menacing in the first degree is a class E felony.

Because the degree of the crime directly relates to the term of potential imprisonment (see our sentencing chart for further information), it critical that you consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney about these offenses. It may be that you have a valid legal defense. Regardless of your defense, the former prosecutors at Crotty Saland, LLP know that its note merely your liberty that is at stake when you are accused of these crimes, but your rights and integrity.

As I type, it is likely that Plaxico Burress is sitting in a Manhattan Grand Jury testifying about the events that ultimately resulted in his arrest for possessing a loaded firearm in New York and being charged with Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree. As a former Manhattan prosecutor who served for seven years under Robert Morgenthau and who has cross-examined many defendants in the Grand Jury and represented clients in the same, I have unique insight that many New York criminal defense attorneys do not. The following entry will address some of what happens in this "secret proceeding."

What is the Grand Jury

The Grand Jury in New York State consists of a group of people no different than you or me. Old and young. Doctors and construction workers. Men and women. Black, white and every shade in between. Although in other smaller jurisdictions prosecutors need to convene a Grand Jury, at any given time in New York County (and likely throughout NYC) there are multiple Grand Juries sitting. In fact, Manhattan often has at least three Grand Juries sitting in the morning followed by three in the afternoon. At least one Grand Jury sits all day. This does not include Grand Juries convened by the Office of the Special Narcotics Prosecutor. Grand Juries hear all charged felonies from Assault and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument to Identity Theft and Mr. Burress' Criminal Possession of a Weapon.

The Grand Jury consists of up to twenty three people. On any given day, sixteen Grand Jurors are needed for a quorum. A quorum is required before evidence can be heard. Regardless of whether there are sixteen or twenty three Grand Jurors present, twelve Grand Jurors are always need to vote on the evidence.

Burden of Proof

A determination by the Grand Jury to vote a "true bill" or indict a defendant is not a finding of guilt. A guilty or not guilty verdict is rendered at trial. Instead, the Grand Jury must determine whether there is "reasonable cause to believe" that the accused committed the particular felony crime. Unlike "beyond a reasonable doubt" at trial, "reasonable cause to believe" can also be viewed as whether or not a reasonable person believes that it is probable, based on evidence presented, that the accused is guilty of the crime charged. Regardless of whether the case is before the Grand Jury or before a jury at trial, the evidence must always be legally sufficient to support the charges.

Secrecy of the Grand Jury

Prosecutors cannot share with the public what happened in the Grand Jury (who testified, what was said, the result of the deliberations, etc.). In fact, there are criminal ramifications if he or she does so. However, a witness may reveal what he or she testified about, but not the names of other witnesses or their testimony if they know what that testimony was.

Role of the Prosecutor

There is no judge in the Grand Jury. A prosecutor acts as the judge. That means he or she chooses what evidence is admissible and instructs the Grand Jury on the law. Obviously, the law gives the prosecution ample room to decide how and what to present to the Grand Jury. In fact, prosecutors often provide significantly less evidence to a Grand Jury than they would present at trial. A two day Grand Jury proceeding may become a two week trial. However, being given room to interpret the law does not mean the rules of evidence can be abused or otherwise inadmissible evidence is now admissible.

A criminal defense attorney can protest or challenge the prosecution, but since it is a secret proceeding, it is not likely he or she will know what was presented until after a judge reviews the minutes of the Grand Jury proceeding. That being said, a judge is available for criminal defense attorneys and prosecutors to meet with in the event an issue presents itself during the proceeding.

One thing that is unique about the Grand Jury in New York County (Manhattan) is that the Manhattan District Attorney's Office pursues cases through vertical prosecution. In other words, the prosecutor who picks up the case from its inception is the same prosecutor who presents the case to the Grand Jury and ultimately at trial if necessary. This practice is different from other New York City offices where one prosecutor may draft the initial case, one presents it to the Grand Jury and another prosecutor handles it for trial.

Does the Accused have the Right to Testify

In New York State, a defendant has a right to testify before the Grand Jury. In fact, if the prosecution violates this right and presents the case to the Grand Jury, a judge may dismiss the indictment and require that the prosecution re-present the case to the Grand Jury to allow the defendant to testify. More often than not, however, defendants do not testify before the Grand Jury.

Ramifications of testifying after the jump...

Continue reading " The New York Grand Jury, Plaxico Burress and Any Person Accused of a Crime: Beyond a Possible Indictment What Happens Behind Closed Doors " »

Crotty Saland, LLP has been following the Plaxico Burress case since its inception. In fact, Jeremy Saland's legal analysis has been sought out and utilized by CNNSI.Com, AM-NY and the NJ Star Ledger. Well, according to the NY Post, legendary Manhattan DA Robert Morgenthau is seeking a term in state prison for Plaxico Burress while one of his prosecutors begins presenting the wide receiver's Gun Possession case to the Grand Jury. Mr. Burress is due back in Manhattan Criminal Court Part F on September 23. If a Grand Jury indicts Mr. Burress for the charge of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree for possessing a loaded firearm, however, the case will be adjourned to the Supreme Court Criminal Term in Manhattan for his felony arraignment on the indictment.

If the NY Post is correct, Mr. Morgenthau has been seeking two years of state prison while the defendant's attorney has stated Mr. Burress refused to do more than a year on Riker's Island (which would likely be much less due to "good behavior").

Currently, Mr. Burress faces two charges of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, pursuant to NY Penal Law sections 265.03(3) and 265.03(1)(b). "C" violent felonies, both of these theories of the same crime carry a minimum sentence of 3.5 years and maximum sentence of 15 years upon a conviction. Although these are the only crimes that the defendant appears to be currently charged with on the criminal court complaint, prosecutors are not "stuck" with these charges if the case is presented to the Grand Jury. Additional charges, such as felony Reckless Endangerment (a class "D" non-violent felony punishable by no jail and up to 2 1/3 to 7 years in state prison) could be presented to the Grand Jury at the appropriate time.

Whatever the outcome, Mr. Burress has a long road ahead of him and has reason to be concerned due to the potential sentence he faces. As former Manhattan prosecutors under Robert Morgenthau and as criminal defense attorneys in Manhattan representing clients throughout New York City, we have extensive experience with these crimes. In fact, Crotty Saland, LLP recently obtained an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal (ACD) for one client and a Disorderly Conduct for another client charged with Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree. Charged with possessing loaded handguns, our clients were understandably fearful that they could end up in jail. That being said, they could not have been happier when we worked out deals for them that not only avoided criminal records, but any jail at all.

As this moves along the path to what will likely be an "exciting trial," I expect that we will learn more about what happened that evening. Who else gets caught up in this case (Antonio Pierce) and the evidence that is presented will certainly captivate the media for months to come.

The various sections of the criminal code addressing Promoting Prostitution, pursuant to New York Penal Law sections 230.20, 230.25, 230.30 and 230.32, set forth some of the most serious crimes relating to Prostitution (Penal Law 230.00) in New York State. As a former Manhattan prosecutor and criminal defense attorney who has prosecuted offenders and represented those accused of Prostitution related offenses, I have seen these statutes in action. While the reasons why and the logic behind the severity in which these crimes are pursued by law enforcement is a discussion for another day, it should be overwhelmingly clear to anyone who may be involved in these crimes - the NYPD and the District Attorney's Offices throughout New York City take these offenses very seriously.

Dealing specifically with the crime of Promoting Prostitution, this blog entry will address each degree of this offense and the potential punishment associated with the crimes. Before doing so, however, you need to have a basic understanding of some terms as follows:

1. A person "advances prostitution" when, acting other than as a prostitute or as a patron thereof, he knowingly causes or aids a person to commit or engage in prostitution, procures or solicits patrons for prostitution, provides persons or premises for prostitution purposes, operates or assists in the operation of a house of prostitution or a prostitution enterprise, or engages in any other conduct designed to institute, aid or facilitate an act or enterprise of prostitution.

2. A person "profits from prostitution" when, acting other than as a prostitute receiving compensation for personally rendered prostitution services, he accepts or receives money or other property pursuant to an agreement or understanding with any person whereby he participates or is to participate in the proceeds of prostitution activity.

The charges of Promoting Prostitution can be found after the jump...

Continue reading " NYC Criminal Defense of Prostituion Related Crimes: Promoting Prostitution " »

Some people should just keep white collar criminal defense attorneys on retainer. It seems that at least once every week or two, someone is arrested or indicted for Grand Larceny. While an arrest or an indictment certainly is not evidence of guilt, accusations of "sticky fingers" seems to be all the rage right now. Fortunately for the clients of Crotty Saland, LLP, top Manhattan based white collar criminal defense lawyers, our clients accused of these crimes have utilized our experience and knowledge to get tremendous results. In fact, in the past year each one of them has avoided jail and in some cases criminal records altogether for alleged thefts ranging from $20,000 to the tens of millions of dollars. As former Manhattan Assistant District Attorneys under Robert Morgenthau, we know how prosecutors build, investigate and prosecute these cases. Hopefully for Ms. Diana Lucretia Montague-Griffin's sake, she retains a criminal defense attorney who can keep her from spending from up to the next 25 years in state prison.

According to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, Ms. Montague-Griffin worked at Arcadia Investment Partners, a Manhattan-based private investment firm. While working as the office manager, Ms. Montague-Griffin allegedly made unauthorized wire transfers and forged signatures on checks totaling $1.7 million. From about January 2006 through December 2008, it is alleged that Ms. Montague-Griffin withdrew approximately $375,000 in cash, spent $250,000 to renovate her home and $59,000 for an in-ground pool. It is further alleged that Ms. Montague-Griffin spent thousands of dollars each month on personal items such as hair and skin products, dental care, dining and clothes. Her alleged spending of the firm's money included other purchases at department stores and online including Nordstrom, Macys, QVC, Amazon.com, Target, JC Penny, and Wal-Mart. It is nor clear how much, if any, of the money is still in Ms. Montague-Griffin's possession.

Although Ms. Montague-Griffin is currently in custody in New Jersey, she has agreed to be extradited back to New York on her indictment. While indictments usual occur after a person is arrested, in Ms. Montague-Griffin's case, the Grand Jury indicted her prior to her arrest in what is often referred to as a No-Arrest Indictment or "NA" Indictment.

The indictment charges Ms. Montague-Griffin with one count of Grand Larceny in the First Degree, a class "B" felony. This offense is punishable by up to 8 1/3 to 25 years in prison. Although less serious, but still felonies, the indictment charges Ms. Montague-Griffin with five accounts of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree,10 counts of Forgery in the Second Degree and 10 counts of Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree. Each of these crimes are "D" felonies punishable by up to 2 1/3 to 7 years in state prison.

If Ms. Montague-Griffin has not done so yet, while she awaits being transported back to New York she should consider what her defense should be and how she will implement it. Giving up and throwing one's hands in the air is never the answer. Therefore, instead of compounding what is already a bad situation, Ms. Montague-Griffin should immediately retain experienced criminal counsel.

Robin Katz, the financial analyst at Chase Bank who was arrested for siphoning over $100,000 from a client, may have used a fake ATM card to perpetrate her alleged crime. As a NY criminal defense attorney at Crotty Saland, LLP who has had tremendous results representing clients in white collar crimes and as a former Manhattan prosecutor who spent years assigned to the Identity Theft Major Case Unit, it is clear that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. While that is not an assertion that more allegations will be made against Ms. Katz, it is likely that law enforcement has not released to the public or discovered all of the ways in which this crime was allegedly perpetrated.

A review of the charges against Ms. Katz reveals that she is currently charged with Grand Larceny in the Second Degree as well as Identity Theft in the First Degree. However, if the facts come out as the media has portrayed, I expect that Ms. Katz could be charged with additional crimes. For example, if the ATM card has been recovered or there is evidence that she wrongfully created it, she could be charged with Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument in the Second Degree for physically having it or Forgery in the Second for creating it. Additionally, if she altered Chase records or deleted records to cover up her alleged theft, then prosecutors could charge Ms. Katz with Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree as well. Although Grand Larceny in the Second Degree is the most serious of the offenses and punishable by up to fifteen years in state prison, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument and Forgery in the Second Degrees are punishable by up to seven years in prison while Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree is punishable by up to four years in prison. Regardless of the amount of time she faces, I expect that her time in Rikers and $50,000 bail has made it overwhelmingly clear that any jail time is devastating.

Without knowing all the facts of the case it is difficult to assert what her best defense to these crimes is. Is it trying to mitigate what happened or is there a way to challenge the facts? Whatever the defense, Ms. Katz has a long road ahead of her. The Manhattan District Attorney's Office will certainly not be feeling overly generous with a woman who allegedly perpetrated a crime over a period of months and created an ATM card to do so. However, with an experienced and knowledgeable white collar criminal defense attorney at her side she may one day be able to sit back in her apartment (not a jail cell) recognizing that it could have been much worse.

On a regular basis, individuals in New York such as Robin Katz (the Chase banker recently arrested in Manhattan for Grand Larceny), Lawrence Salander (the Manhattan art gallery owner) and Anthony D. Marshall (the son of Brooke Astor) are accused of white collar crimes. As a result, the accused seek counsel from experienced white collar criminal defense attorneys and lawyers who will zealously advocate for their clients regardless of the circumstances they may face.

Crotty Saland, LLP, understands how important dedicated and experienced counsel is and believes in the philosophy that it is not merely working tirelessly that is crucial, but it is equally as critical to identify and set into motion a well orchestrated plan to preserve our client's liberty and good name. As New York white collar criminal defense attorneys and as former Manhattan prosecutors under Robert Morgenthau, we know how to not only construct a case from the perspective of law enforcement, but how to take it down as well. Certainly, each case requires its own distinct analysis, but our experience has paid off for our clients in white collar crimes involving offenses such as Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, Forgery, and Falsifying Business Records.

Over the past year, Crotty Saland, LLP has represented two individuals investigated for Grand Larceny crimes in excess of five millions dollars and tens of millions of dollars respectively. While one client was indicted, he was not incarcerated and permitted to civilly litigate a substantial part of that money due to issues raised in the tax code. While that disposition was tremendous because our client was kept out of prison despite a mandatory minimum state prison sentence required by statute, the District Attorney's Office agreed to drop the investigation and case against our other client after he agreed to file numerous old tax returns and negotiations revealed a financial assessment was incorrect.

Every white collar crime does not involve thefts in the millions of dollars, but are still pursued vigorously by law enforcement. In fact, Crotty Saland, LLP has represented multiple individuals accused of thefts ranging between twenty thousand dollars to well north of fifty thousand dollars. In each of the cases that we have resolved on behalf of our clients, not one of them has been sentenced to jail or even probation. In fact, some of them have even received a misdemeanor or worked out a disposition where after the client returned to court a few times, the prosecution agreed to move for an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (dismissal of the case after six months).

Although we have been very successful representing our white collar clients, no law firm can predict or guarantee a particular result. Certainly, a particular result on one case is no indication, guarantee or promise of success on a new and distinct matter. Each case is unique and an accused may face the grim reality of a felony and incarceration. That being said, there is one thing that Crotty Saland, LLP guarantees to all of our clients - we will fight on your behalf and pursue as many legal and ethical avenues as possible to protect your freedom, rights and integrity.

The crimes of Forgery (NY Penal Law 170.50, 170.10 and 170.15) and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument (NY Penal Law 170.20, 170.25 and 170.30) are crimes that White Collar criminal defense attorneys handle or deal with on a regular basis. Whether the facts revolve around counterfeit money, falsified mortgages or even fake credit cards, somewhere prior to committing the Forgery or Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, the item in question had to have been created. Although the police usually only get their hands on the finished product, i.e., the fake credit card, there is a distinct and separate crime of Criminal Possession of Forgery Devices that relates directly to the creation of these fraudulent items.

According to Penal Law 170.40, Criminal Possession of a Forgery Device, a person is guilty of this crime when (1) he makes or possesses with knowledge of its character any plate, die or other device, apparatus, equipment, or article specifically designed for use in counterfeiting or otherwise forging written instruments; or (2) with intent to use,or to aid or permit another to use, the same for purposes of forgery, he makes or possesses any device, apparatus, equipment or article capable of or adaptable to such use. This crime is a "D" felony punishable by up to seven years in state prison.

As stated above, this offense is far less common than the crimes of Forgery or Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, but is potentially the same level offense. Regardless of the particular Forgery or Fraud related crime you find yourself being charged with or investigated for, contact the criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Crotty Saland, LLP so you can arm yourself with our experience and knowledge while protecting your liberty and integrity.

Crotty Saland, LLP, one of the top New York City and Manhattan based criminal defense firms, is pleased to announce the dismissal of the criminal charge of Assault in the Third Degree, pursuant to NY Penal Law 120.00(1), against our client. The case, a difficult one to defeat, involved an alleged altercation between our client during a "road rage" type incident.

After our client's car was struck by the complainant's vehicle, our client, driving a mini-cooper, confronted the complainant over the incident. Our client exited the mini-cooper and approached the other vehicle. To the "big" surprise of the complainant, the man who stepped out of the mini-cooper was 6'10 and 320 pounds (I can't speculate how he got into that mini-cooper). As the incident unfolded, the police claimed they observed our client strike the complainant through the window of the car. Ultimately, our client was arrested.

Despite the "big" issues in the case, the case in its entirety was dismissed after almost eight months of legal wrangling. Although it took some time, the client and his family were more than pleased with the outcome.

If you or a loved one is in need of an experienced criminal defense lawyer for a violent or white collar crime, contact the criminal defense attorneys and former prosecutors at Crotty Saland, LLP.

As a NY criminal defense attorney I have drafted numerous entries dealing with the crime of Endangering the Welfare of a Child. It is a serious crime with ramifications beyond the criminal law and a crime that people from all walks of life – from lawyers and physicians to construction workers and bus drivers - can face. Once again I am writing an entry on this crime. Only a few weeks ago, a noteworthy New York criminal court decision, and one you should be aware of, regarding Endangering the Welfare of a Child was handed down.

In People v. People v. Franklin Lora, 2008NY083374, decided March 26, 2009, the defendant, in the presence of his two children under the age of five, allegedly placed a gun to his wife’s head and threatened to kill her. The defendant’s attorney argued that the complaint against his client should be dismissed for facial insufficiency because the defendant’s conduct was directed at the wife and not the children. In other words, because the children merely were present and not part of the underlying crime that was the basis of the endangerment, the charge of Endangering the Welfare of a Child cannot stand.

Disagreeing with the criminal defense lawyer, Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Yavinsky held that “…the act of threatening [the complainant], in front of her young children, that she was ‘gonna get it’ and would be ‘next on [the defendant's] list’ while brandishing what appeared to be a firearm, would be sufficient to sustain a conviction for Endangering the Welfare of a Child.” The court relied on the Court of Appeals decision in People v. Johnson, 95 NY2d 368 (2000) in deciding against the defendant and his contention that the children need to be the subject or target of the behavior.

In Johnson, the Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, held that "[n]othing in the [Endangering the Welfare of a Child] statute restricts its application solely to harmful conduct directed at children." Moreover, the Court stated that it is sufficient to establish that the defendant knowingly acted in a manner likely to be injurious to a child when the domestic violence only occurs in the presence of a child even if the act is not direct at the child.

Obviously, regardless of the criminal ramifications, we should all be careful to behave properly, safely and appropriately in front of children. If you are accused of behavior that falls into the realm of Endangering the Welfare of a Child, contact Crotty Saland, LLP to fight for your rights and to make sure that an ugly allegation that is lacking in truth and facts does not destroy your integrity or land you behind bars.

The Manhattan District Attorney's Office has painted a very bad picture of Lawrence Salander, Leigh Morse and the Salander O'Reilly Galleries after they obtained a second indictment in connection with Mr. Salander's alleged theft from and defrauding of the estates of numerous artists.

As I previously noted in the first two blog entries, Mr. Salander has already been arrested and indicted in connection to an 88 million dollar fraud. This second offense involves the alleged theft of an additional 5 million dollars from numerous estates. These estates had given their works of art to Mr. Salander and his gallery so that they could be sold or exhibited.

It is alleged by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office that one of the victims is the estate of Robert De Niro, Sr., an American abstract expressionist painter, who is the father of actor Robert De Niro, Jr. It is claimed that artwork provided by Mr. De Niro's estate was sold by the Saldner O'Reilley Gallery without notice or, in the alternative, without proper payment.

According to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office:

"[T]he investigation revealed that the Estate of Robert De Niro, Sr. formally began a relationship with defendants in 1994 when the Salander-O'Reilly Gallery was made the exclusive representative of the Estate. As such, the Gallery was tasked with the promotion, sale, and exhibition of Robert De Niro, Sr. works. Throughout their 14-year relationship, Mr. Salander and other dealers of the Salander-O'Reilly Galleries, including Ms. Morse, repeatedly sold De Niro, Sr. works, did not inform the Estate of the actual volume of sales, and did not pay the Estate for the majority of those sales. The investigation further revealed that Mr. Salander repeatedly used the stolen funds or the works of art themselves to satisfy Salander-O'Reilly Galleries’ debts. For instance, in June 2006, Mr. Salander and the Gallery entered into a settlement agreement whereby the Gallery relinquished full title and ownership of several works of art owned by the Estate of Robert De Niro, Sr. and other artists to a gallery in Italy, to satisfy the Salander-O'Reilly Galleries’ multi-million dollar debt to that Italian gallery."

While Mr. Salander still faces up to twenty five years in prison on the new charges relating to Grand Larceny in the First Degree, Ms. Morse "merely" faces up to seven years in prison due to the indictment charging her with Grand Larceny in the Third Degree and four years in prison for the charge of Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree.

If you or a loved one is charged with any fraud or white collar related crime in New York, contact the former Manhattan prosecutors and criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland, LLP to preserve your freedom and good name.

Crotty Saland, LLP has learned that Lawrence Salander, the famous owner of a well know art gallery in Manhattan that was recently closed, faces new charges in association with an 88 million dollar fraud scheme. A Manhattan Grand Jury has already indicted Mr. Salander for Grand Larceny in the First Degree, Securities Fraud, Falsifying Business Records, Forgery and Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument. Although it is unclear whether the new indictment is for separate and distinct crimes or for activities associated with the first indictment, Mr. Salander faces up to twenty five years in the first case. He is due back in Manhattan Supreme Court before Judge Obus on July 31, 2009.

The former Manhattan prosecutors and New York criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland, LLP will keep you informed as we learn more.

***UPDATE***

In New York State and New York City, you can be arrested, indicted and convicted for Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance (drugs such as cocaine and heroin), Criminal Possession of a Weapon (firearms, guns, pistols and certain knives) as well as other charges even if you physically do not possess the contraband. At its simplest level, you need not possess in your hands or anywhere on your person the gun, drugs, etc. Under New York law, your possession may be "constructive."

In People v. Lawrence Johnson, 2008NY091609, decided May 26, 2009, a New York County (Manhattan) Criminal Court issued a decision directly dealing with the legal concept of "constructive possession." In that matter, the defendant was charged with Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Seventh Degree (Penal Law §220.03), Criminally Using Drug Paraphernalia in the Second Degree (PL §220.50[2]) and Unlawful Possession of Marihuana (PL§221.05).

Briefly, after the police executed a search warrant in an apartment, the officers recovered plates with razors, each of which had cocaine residue. Additionally, the officers recovered numerous clear empty plastic bags which they alleged were "consistent with that of packaging narcotics for sale" from the bedroom where the defendant and the co-defendant were when they were arrested. Finally, the officers recovered a scale and two large bags of marijuana as well as eighteen smaller bags of marijuana from the living room. The defendant challenged the accusations against him by arguing that he was not in possession of the narcotics and contraband recovered.

The court determined the following:

Continue reading " NY Drug Possession and Your Criminal Defense: Legal Possession of Drugs without Physical Possession " »

The Manhattan District Attorney's Office announced last month the arrest and indictment of Marc A. Bernstein for Grand Larceny in the Second Degree as well a other charges for an alleged scheme where he stole over $600,000 from client escrow accounts. Well, unfortunately for Mr. Bernstein, the Manhattan District Attorney's Office announced once again that he had been re-arrested (he was out of custody on $250,000 bail) and charged with multiple counts of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree for stealing $1,500,000 from five clients' escrow accounts. In total, the alleged theft is approximately $2,200,000.

According to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office:

"In the typical case, Mr. Bernstein negotiated a settlement on behalf of the victim, took control of the incoming settlement money and then stole it. In one instance that has now given rise to charges, Bernstein, acting as an escrow agent, received $900,000 in real estate deposit money on a contract of sale for the purchase of a building in lower Manhattan and stole that money from the intended purchaser of the property."

In the current case involving the $1,500,000, as opposed to the previous theft case involving approximate $600,000, the Grand Jury indicted the defendant for Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, Grand Larceny in the Third Degree and Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree. Grand Larceny in the Second Degree is punishable by up to 5 to 15 years in prison, Grand Larceny in the Third Degree is punishable by up to 2 1/3 to 7 years in prison and Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree is punishable by up to 1 1/3 to 4 years in prison.

It is interesting to note that since these scheme involve different clients and different times, it is possible, albeit unlikely, that the sentences can run consecutive, as opposed to concurrent. Moreover, although it is commonly done where the scheme involves the same victims as opposed to multiple victims, there is case law permitting an aggregation of the total amount to raise the level of the crime as opposed to making each theft from each victim a distinct and separate lesser offense. Regardless, Mr. Bernstein faces serious challenges ahead.

Whatever the challenge is before you or a loved one, contact the white collar criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland, LLP.

It seems like every day you open the newspaper some crew or group of individuals is either being arrested, investigated or indicted for Enterprise Corruption in New York City. Well, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced the indictment of 12 people and 9 corporations for Enterprise Corruption and other crimes. According to the Attorney General "The Levy Enterprise" paid hospital employees for confidential patient information, lured patients into receiving unnecessary treatment, and then submitted over a million dollars in phony personal injury claims to insurance carriers.

The 147 count indictment unsealed yesterday charges Daniel Levy, Dr. Hoi Yat Kam, Alex Levy, Desmond Connell, Daniel G. Madrid, Ronald J. Schwartz, Dr. Salvatore Lentini, Yan Yan Yu, Dr. Haroutyoun Tiikranian, Lai Fan Xue, Cheng He, and Dr. Aleksandra Gashinskaya, in varying capacities with Enterprise Corruption, Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree, Money Laundering in the Second Degree, Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, Insurance Fraud in the Third Degree, Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree and other charges. These men and women, some of whom are doctors and lawyers, face not only the potential sentence of 25 years in prison on the Enterprise Corruption and 4 years on the "lesser" charge of Falsifying Business Records, but also face the real risk of being disbarred from their particular practice areas. Mary Jimenez and Lloyd Modeste, both hospital employees, were charged with Bribe Receiving on a separate complaint, but do not appear to have been indicted by the Grand Jury.

If you find yourself under investigation, arrest or indictment for a white collar or violent crime contact the criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland, LLP. As former prosecutors in the Manhattan District Attorneys Office who served under Robert Morgenthau for more than a combined thirteen years, the white collar criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland, LLP stand ready to fight to protect your name and liberty.

Crotty Saland, LLP a top white collar criminal defense firm, has learned that the Manhattan District Attorney's Office has announced the indictment of thirteen individuals and a mortgage company in connection to a mortgage fraud scheme allegedly perpetrated in the New York City region over the past four years. Charged with Enterprise Corruption (PL 460.20), Grand Larceny in the First and Second Degrees (PL 155.42 and PL 155.40), Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree (PL 190.65) and Conspiracy in the Fifth Degree (PL 105.05), it is alleged that:

AFG Financial Group, Eugene Culbreath, Eric Shields, Matthew McDermott, Marc Zirogiannis, Kenneth Law, Kathleen Scanlon, Jeffrey Phelan, Jerry Strklja, Marilyn Mateo, Darlita Bostic, Allyson Hinds, and Rajmohan Autar, in varying roles, "...located distressed residential real estate properties in New York City and surrounding counties. They then engaged in a fraudulent scheme to steal millions of dollars from lending banks in Manhattan and elsewhere using sham sales of those properties. The conspirators caused the banks to front millions of dollars to finance purchases of the properties. They then walked away with most of the cash, leaving behind over-valued properties and worthless mortgage papers." The Manhattan District Attorney's Office further claims that recruiters found straw buyers who would be paid to enter into a real estate transaction where they were informed that the true homeowner would benefit from they service. Moreover, the straw buyers were told they would receive further compensation. After the mortgages and transactions were completed, the straw buyers did not receive any compensation and were left with possession of the mortgages which they could not pay. As a result, not only did the straw buyers lose money, but their credit went drastically south.

Not only is it alleged that fraudulent mortgage documents, falsified W2s and and inflated appraisals were created to perpetrate this crime, but is is further claimed by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office that lawyers for AFG Financial Group would, among other things, be present at closings in order to make sure the scheme ran smoothly.

In total, it is believed that the sum of the mortgage scheme was in the neighborhood of one hundred million dollars.

If convicted of Grand Larceny in the First Degree or Enterprise Corruption, the defendants face up to 8 and 1/3 to 25 years in prison. Grand Larceny in the Second Degree carries a sentence of up to 5 to 15 years in prison and Scheme to Defraud in the First Degree has a potential term of imprisonment of 1 and 1/3 to 4 years in prison. Conspiracy in the Fifth Degree is a misdemeanor punishable by up to 1 year on Riker's Island.

As a former Manhattan prosecutor who served under Robert Morgenthau supervising multi-million dollar fraud schemes and as white collar criminal defense attorney who has successfully represented clients in Manhattan for alleged million dollar theft schemes, I must say that these defendants need to act quickly to ascertain and implement their strongest defense. I have mentioned in the past that Investigation Division Central, the bureau handling this case, consists of prosecutors who are not merely aggressive in their pursuit of criminal activity, but made up of individuals who are thorough in that pursuit. Delays on the part of the defendants could be costly.

If you or a loved one is the target of an investigation, under arrest or facing and indictment, contact the white collar criminal defense attorneys at Crotty Saland, LLP so you can put forth your best defense to preserve your rights, liberty and integrity.

Crotty Saland, LLP is pleased to announce that our attorneys and lawyers are offering a new service to clients. Instead of bankruptcy, we will help you re-negotiate your credit card debt to give you credit card debt relief. In doing so, we may be able to significantly reduce your credit card debt by stopping interest rates from compounding, cutting the principle owed to a manageable amount and obtaining a reasonable monthly payment that is affordable. Being in credit card debt does not mean that you must declare bankruptcy to save yourself from ruin and collection agencies. Call our attorneys today so we can help you get your life back on track.

CreditCardDebtLawyers.Com

It comes in different shapes and sizes - DWI (Driving While Intoxicated), DWAI (Driving While Ability Impaired) and DUI (Driving Under the Influence) - but regardless of the particular offense in New York (both NYC and Westchester), prosecutors and judges take these charges very seriously. As a former Manhattan prosecutor and as a criminal defense attorney at Crotty Saland, LLP, I have handled countless DWIs, DWAIs and DUIs whether they are charged as VTL 1192.1, VTL 1192.2, VTL 1192.2-a or VTL 1192.3. One particular question that I have heard asked in various forms is "how can I be charged with DWI if there is no breathalyzer or intoxilizer that indicates how much alcohol I had in my system?" The answer to this question is quite simple. As we call it in the criminal law field, a DWI without a chemical test result and one based on an officer's observation is "Common Law" DWI.

Unlike VTL 1192.2 which requires a reading of alcohol in a person's blood to be .08 of one per centum or more, a person is guilty of Driving While Intoxicated pursuant to "Common Law" VTL 1192.3 if they operate a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition. Well, if there is no reading or analysis, what does law enforcement hang it's hat on to establish this crime? Very often the police cite certain characteristics of the accused across the board. The officers claim that that the accused had "water bloodshot eyes," "slurred speech," "the smell of alcohol on their breath," and they were "unsteady." Maybe the police allege that a person was asleep at the wheel, was driving erratically, or even threw up on themselves. One of the easiest ways they establish your lack of sobriety is based on the boneheaded mistake that people of all walks of life make when confronted by the police regardless of the accusation. That is, they make an admission. Something as simple as "I only had a few (or couple) of beers." Well, if you didn't present any of the characteristics mentioned above, but you stated you had a couple of beers, you probably just bought yourself a trip to the precinct and ultimately before a judge.

As I always state, DWI is a serious and terrible offense. The lives of many innocent people are put in harm's way if one gets behind the wheel intoxicated. That being said, an accusation or an arrest is not evidence of guilt. It could be that you did have two beers, but you are 6'4 230 pounds. Maybe you did have bloodshot eyes because you had not changed your contact lenses for a day or you were in a room full of cigarette smokers. Are these excuses? No, and in fact may be legitimate reasons why a wrongful conclusion was made that you were driving drunk.

Whatever the set of facts, fighting a DWI with counsel that is not experienced in criminal law and DWIs in particular can and often does compound a bad situation. If you are accused of any crime, contact the criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Crotty Saland, LLP. We are ready and able to pursue any legal and ethical avenue to protect your liberty, integrity and rights.

The Manhattan District Attorney's Office announced the indictment earlier today of Mark A. Focht, the former Chief Operating Officer of 3V Capital Management LLC. It is alleged that Mr. Focht perpetrated the white collar crime of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree (PL 155.40) by stealing $250,000 from one of the funds that he managed. He is also charged with Forgery in the Second Degree (PL 170.10) and Falsifying Business Records (PL 175.10) in the First Degree for allegedly creating forged documents to both execute his thefts and to cover them up once he was done.

According to the Manhattan District Attorney's Office's press release:

Mark A. Focht "stole $250,000 by using a forged authorization form to wire $250,000 out of a bank account of Pierce Diversified Strategy Master Fund, LLC, one of the funds managed by 3V Capital Management. Mr. Focht used the stolen money to make a personal investment to benefit himself. To conceal the missing $250,000, Mr. Focht created forged documents that falsely represented to both Mr. Focht’s employer and to the client hedge fund that the $250,000 had been invested on behalf of the hedge fund. In fact, the $250,000 was invested by Mr. Focht for his own purposes, in violation of the legal, fiduciary and ethical obligations he owed his clients."

If convicted of the Grand Larceny in the Second Degree, Mr. Foch faces up to 15 years in prison. Forgery in the Second Degree is punishable by up to 7 years in prison and Falsifying Business Records is punishable by up to 4 years in prison.

As a former Manhattan prosecutor who served under Robert Morgenthau for seven years, I supervised white collar investigations and prosecutions with the NYPD, Secret Service, Postal Inspection Service, State Department and SEC. Many of these prosecutions involved multiple millions of dollars in theft through both forgery and the falsification of business records. The prosecutors who are handling this case are not merely diligent and methodical in their investigations, but experienced in these types of crimes. In fact, the bureau that is pursuing this case, Investigation Division Central, consists of many elite prosecutors and support staff who for years have handled similar crimes and obtained convictions for those crimes. In short, Mr. Focht and his criminal defense attorney have a lot of work ahead of them.

Whether you are charged with Grand Larceny, Forgery or Falsifying Business Records, a white collar criminal defense attorney with practical experience who has battled in the trenches on both sides is required in order to preserve your liberty and integrity. While no attorney can guarantee a particular result, the white collar criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Crotty Saland, LLP have the experience, knowledge and tenacity to assess your case and implement the right plan to zealously defend your rights, freedom and good name.