Criminal Procedure

Published on: July 13, 2012

Defendant Claims Wide Variation of Results with an Intoxilyzer

by Stephen Bilkis

The People of the State of New York are the respondents in the case. The Appellant in the matter is William E. Lent, Jr. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York in the 9th and 10th Judicial Districts of the Appellate Term. Judges Nicolai, P.J., Tanenbaum, and Iannacci, JJ is present.

This is a case of appeal. The judgments that are being appealed were made in the District Court of Nassau County, First Department. The defendant has been convicted of driving while intoxicated per se and speeding. These judgments were made during a jury trial.

Case Background

Published on: July 12, 2012

Plaintiff Alleges Racketeering Crimes

by Stephen Bilkis

Arlene Lichtenstein for herself and as the Administratrix of the Estate of Irwin Lichtenstein, deceased, is the plaintiffs in the case. The defendants in the case are Alfred Polizzotto, Florence Polizzotto, Sol Cohen, Al Gallo, and Rosemary whose last name is not known. John Doe 1, 2, and 3 are also defendants in the matter. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York located in New York County. Judge Peter Tom is overseeing the case.

The defendants have moved to have the amended complaint against them dismissed. They state that the complaint does not state a cause action as determined by the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

The plaintiff is accusing the defendant Alfred Polizzotto of converting the assets of the plaintiff and the assets of the Estate of Irwin Lichtenstein for his own personal benefit and use. The plaintiff states he was acting in concert with the other defendants in the matter.

Published on: July 12, 2012

Defendant Accused of Operating a Ship While Under the Influence

by Stephen Bilkis

The plaintiffs in this case are the People of the State of New York. The defendant of the case is George P. Briggs. The case is being heard in the Nassau County District Court, First District, and Criminal Court.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said the defendant was tried without a jury for an accusation of boating while intoxicated, which is in violation of Navigation Law section 49. There were numerous questions that were brought up during this case, which makes a written response necessary.

Case Facts

Published on: July 12, 2012

Court Looks at Probable Cause for DWI Arrest

by Stephen Bilkis

The People of the State of New York are the plaintiffs in this matter. The defendant in the case is Thomas D. Alberto. The case is being heard in the District Court of Suffolk County, First District. Judge Salvatore A. Alamia is hearing the case.

The defendant, Thomas D. Alberto has been charged with driving while intoxicated, reckless driving, speeding, and driving the wrong way. A New York Criminal Lawyer said a Dunaway and Huntley was heard in regard to the case to determine which evidence against the defendant will be submitted during trial. Both the plaintiff and the defendant have been given the opportunity to submit closing statements in the matter. The closing statement for the defendant has been received by the court. The People have not submitted a written closing statement and have thus waived their right to do so.

Before the hearing took place the People told the court that the compact disc that contained the 911 calls and dispatches that concerned the incident have been destroyed pursuant to the New York State Police Policy that only saves these recordings for six months.

Published on: July 11, 2012

Court Discusses RICO Claim

by Stephen Bilkis

Ideal Steel Supply Corporation is the plaintiff in this case. The defendants in the case are Marshall H. Beil, et al. the case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York located in Queens County. Judge Peter Joseph Kelly is presiding over the hearing.

The defendants have moved for an order to have the complaints made against them by the plaintiff dismissed.

Case Background

Published on: July 11, 2012

Defendant Contends Miranda Rights Were Violated

by Stephen Bilkis

This case is being heard in the First District Court of Suffolk County. The plaintiff in the case is the People of the State of New York. The defendant of the case is Jose R. Rivas. Judge M. Filiberto is overseeing the proceeding.

There has been a combined Probable Cause, Huntley, and Refusal Hearing in this matter. The Court has found the following facts in the case.

Case Facts

Published on: July 10, 2012

Court Decides Parole for SOMTA Qualifying Offense

by Stephen Bilkis

Respondent Mustafa Rashid pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree robbery, and single counts of first-degree burglar, first-degree rape, and first-degree sodomy. This plea satisfied charges arising from two separate criminal incident the robbery of a gas station attendant and a home invasion, for which Rashid was arrested and indicted separately in 1988. He was sentenced to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 8 to 16 years, running from his arrest.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said that, Rashid was released to parole supervision in July 1999, after serving 11 years and eight months of his sentence. But he was again arrested and indicted separately for three robberies. Thereafter, he pleaded guilty to two counts of third-degree robbery, for each of which he was sentenced to an indeterminate term of 2 to 4 years, and one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, for which he was sentenced to prison for one year. The indictment satisfied by Rashid’s plea to the weapon-possession count also accused him of sexual abuse. These sentences ran concurrently to each other but consecutively to the undischarged portion of the indeterminate sentence imposed on Rashid in 1992. He was subsequently released to parole supervision.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said that, Rashid was returned to prison for violating the conditions of his parole. He was released to parole supervision again in April 2007, but went back to prison after violating the conditions of his parole in August of that year. Rashid was next released to parole supervision in early 2008. He was arrested for the misdemeanor crimes of petit larceny, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree on May 6, 2008. Upon pleading guilty to petit larceny, Rashid received a definite sentence, which he served at Rikers Island, a local correctional facility. Rashid remained subject to the supervision of the State Division of Parole throughout his time at Rikers Island, but his parole was not revoked, apparently because his jail sentence ended days before his parole expiration date: Rashid was freed from Rikers Island, and his parole supervision ended, when he reached the maximum term (20 years) of his consecutive indeterminate sentences.

Published on: July 10, 2012

Attorney Disbared in Wire Fraud Case

by Stephen Bilkis

This case deals with a matter concerning the attorney and counselor at law, Cheddi B. Goberdhan. The petitioner in the matter is the Grievance Committee for the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts. Cheddi B. Goberdhan is the respondent. The case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division; Second Judicial Department. A. Gail Prudenti, P.J. , William F. Mastro, Peter B. Skelos, Reinaldo E. Rivera, and Leonard B. Austin, JJ are the judges hearing the case.

Case Background

The Grievance Committee from the Second, Eleventh, and Thirteenth Judicial Districts has motioned for the name of the respondent to be taken off the roll of attorneys and counselors at law. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the reason for this motion is that the respondent was convicted of a felony, which is in violation of Judiciary Law Section 904.

Published on: July 8, 2012

Defendant Contends 6th Amendment Rights Were Violated During Trial

by Stephen Bilkis

This is an appeal case. The case is being heard in the Second Department, Appellate Division, of the Supreme court of the State of New York. The respondent in the case is the People of the State of New York. The appellant of the case is Jean Cantave. The People of the State of New York are represented by John M. Castellano, Roni C. Piplani, and Sharon Y. Brodt from the District Attorneys office in Kew Gardens New York. The appellant is represented by the law offices of Lynn W.L. Fahey of New York, New York with De Nice Powell for counsel.

A New York Criminal Lawyer said the defendant is appealing an order that was made by the Queens County Supreme Court. The order was issued on the 28th of June, 2008 and convicted the defendant of first degree rape and first degree sexual abuse.

Case Background

Published on: July 7, 2012

Defendant Claims Charges Should Not Have Been Combined

by Stephen Bilkis

The People of the State of New York is the respondent in the case. The appellant in the matter is Morris Pinkas, also referred to as Morris Pinkasovitz. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the case is being heard in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department.

The defendant is appealing an order made by the Queens County Supreme Court. The order was made on the 13th of June, 1988 and convicted the defendant of sexual abuse in the first degree, attempted rape in the first degree, and two counts of endangering the welfare of a child.

Case Background