Published on:

Court Decides DWI Case

According to a New York DWI Lawyer, the defendant has filed a motion to deny the request made by the prosecution that he should be sentenced as a felony offender for the first time. The defendant had given a guilty plea for attempting to sell illegal drugs. The defendant was convicted for assault charges which he admitted he was guilty. He was sentenced to a prison term of at least one or one and half years. The maximum sentence is four years. The defendant has already admitted that he was the same defendant who was initially charged for the first felony. The defendant has challenged the conviction made in his second conviction. The defendant contends that he received ineffective counsel from his lawyer.

The defendant presented a memorandum to support his motion. The letter memorandum contained an outline of the defendant’s case. It also includes information that the defendant had informed his lawyer about the facts of his alleged offenses. These offenses were the basis of his current assault conviction.

A New York DWI Lawyer said that the defendant further contends that his previous lawyer failed to present a DWI defense during his previous conviction. The defendant also challenged the prosecution that his guilty plea should be removed from the records since he was denied the effective counsel assistance. To support this statement, the defendant has submitted a letter from that lawyer who affirms the circumstances that are relevant to his guilty plea. The prosecution has opposed the motion of the defendant and filed a motion for the court to sentence him for his second felony conviction. It has been noted by the court that the defendant did not submit to a letter from the previous case’s lawyer that should have explained the circumstances involved.

A Nassau County Criminal Lawyer prosecution has established the preceding conviction. It is now up to the defendant to prove that it has no legal basis. The court has found that the defendant did not submit any document that would explain the circumstances of his guilty plea. The defendant did not provide an explanation as to why there was no affidavit from the counsel.

The testimony of the defendant during the hearing was found to be self-serving. It doesn’t contain an explanation for the defendant’s claims of ineffective counsel. Since there was no explanation provided for the surrounding circumstances, the court will next examine the assertion if his previous conviction had constitutional merit.

To shed light to the case, the court has evaluated the minutes of the defendant’s statements during his guilty plea. However, the court did not find anything relevant to the case. There was no information as to how the prior lawyer will defend his client. The contentions of the defendant were outlined in an unsworn document by the defendant’s current counsel. The memorandum prepared by the current counsel contained statements that are contradictory to the events described by the defendant concerning his assault case.

As the hearing began, the defendant had presented a different version of the events that had transpired. This was entirely different from the events relayed in the memorandum before the hearing. In the contradictory statement, he was involved in a fight with his girlfriend which led to physical blows. The girl sustained physical injuries. In this version of his statement, the defendant claimed that he was only acting out of self-defense and denied being intoxicated. The defendant admitted to drinking before the fight happened.

Due to the differences in statements, the court has found that the defendant’s testimony had no credibility. The defendant also admitted that he did not let his lawyer know that he was intoxicated at the time. He also admitted that he only told his lawyer that he had been drinking and not exactly drunk.

The evidence presented before the court proved that the defendant could not establish his claim of ineffective legal counsel. The previous lawyer’s performance was reasonably effective and showed no prejudice.

Stop worrying about your DWI case and hire a qualified legal counsel. To schedule a personal conference meeting, contact Stephen Bilkis & Associates and get a free consultation.

Contact Information