IN THE NEWS Category Archives — Page 13 of 17 — New York Criminal Attorney Blog Published by White Plains, New York Criminal Defense Lawyers

THE TRUE COST OF NEW YORK TRAFFIC TICKETS

October 10, 2009 | Peter Howard Tilem

Many articles have been written about the numerous costs of paying traffic tickets. While New York traffic fines are high and surcharges that are imposed by the Courts have recently been increased, there are many hidden costs that New York Driver’s need to be aware when deciding whether or not to fight their New York Traffic Ticket.

One such surprise is the New York Driver Responsibility Assessment covered in a past blog. In a nutshell, the New York Driver Responsibility Assessment imposes a fee, billed by the New York State DMV of $300 when you get 6 points on your license and $75 per point over 6. The fee is payable over three years.

Another hidden cost comes from your insurance company. According to an article published on the National Motorist Association website, one traffic violation can raise your insurance 20% per year for a period of three years. According to the article even if your insurance costs a modest $800 that works out to $480 over three years. The article further explains that a second offense in 3 years can result in a 40% increase which can cost you $1200 more just in insurance.

New York City Mace Issue Has Sparked Interest

October 5, 2009 | Jasmine Hernandez

Our July 15, 2009 blog on the Auxiliary Police Officer arrested for possession of Mace has sparked tremendous interest with many calling our firm or writing in about the issue and many wanting to find out how to obtain a New York City permit for mace. Some have contacted us about there failed efforts to obtain information about the permit from the New York City Police Department. The regulations are summarized in our May 24, 2009 blog. So I leave it to you; if any one knows how to obtain a New York City permit for mace, please comment to this blog, or contact Tilem & Campbell with the information. I will publish the results in a future blog.

TILEM & CAMPBELL LAUNCHES AD CAMPAIGN USING 888-DWI-COUNSEL

October 4, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

New York DWI defense firm Tilem & Campbell has recently launched an ad campaign targeting individuals accused of Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) and/or related charges. The campaign, which involves, print, radio and internet media uses the toll free number 888-DWI-COUNSEL which corresponds to the numbers (888) 394-2686. The campaign also utilizes the domain address www.888dwicounsel.com. The toll free vanity number and domain should help the public locate Tilem & Campbell. DWI-COUNSEL is spelled with the SEL at the end and not COUNCIL with the CIL at the end to indicate that the firm counsels those accused of DWI.

The lawyers at Tilem & Campbell have a wealth of experience and knowledge in DWI and related cases and can assist those accused. Two lawyers at Tilem & Campbell are former prosecutors, in addition a third has recently completed courses in Driving Under the Influence Detection and Narcotics Field Testing.

Anyone who has been accused in New York of Driving While Intoxicated, Driving While Ability Impaired by Alcohol, Driving While Ability Impaired by Drugs or any related charges is encouraged to call 888-DWI-COUNSEL for a free consultation either in person or over the telephone.

NYPD COP’S BLOOD NOT DRAWN FOR MORE THAN SEVEN HOURS AFTER FATAL ACCIDENT – UPDATE

September 30, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

According to today’s newspapers the NYPD Cop accused of killing a woman while driving in an intoxicated condition, had a blood alcohol content of 0.0 indicating that no alcohol was present in the officers blood seven hours after the incident. The blood was not drawn for seven hours after the accident. As discussed in my previous blog, New York drivers arrested for DWI have the right to refuse to take a chemical test. The result of the blood test substantially weakens the case against the officer who is accused of killing the woman while driving drunk.

NYPD COP’S BLOOD NOT DRAWN FOR MORE THAN SEVEN HOURS AFTER FATAL ACCIDENT – A DRIVER’S RIGHT TO REFUSE A CHEMICAL TEST

September 29, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

Early Sunday morning, New York City Police Officer Andrew Kelly, while allegedly driving in an intoxicated condition, struck and killed 32 year old Vionique Valnord in Old Mill Basin, Brooklyn. The accident happened at approximately 12:41 a.m., however, Kelly’s blood was not drawn for more than seven hours. How can this happen? Simple, Officer Kelly exercised his statutory right to refuse to submit to a chemical test.

Let’s start with a brief overview of New York’s “deemed consent” law. To summarize the law; every New York driver is deemed to have given consent to the testing of their breath, blood, urine or saliva to determine the alcoholic and/or drug content of their blood provided the officer has reasonable grounds to believe the driver is impaired or intoxicated and the test is administered within two hours of arrest. See NY VTL § 1194(2)(a)(1), (2) see also 10 NYCRR 59.2 (All samples shall be collected within two hours of the time of arrest).

However, a driver has a qualified statutory right to refuse to submit to a chemical test. The right to refuse is qualified in several ways. Yes, one may refuse to take the test and, absent a court order, no test will be given. However, although one may refuse the test, if properly warned of the consequences, and if they persistently refuse, they may incur a “civil” penalty which includes a fine and the revocation of their driver’s license if the refusal is proven at a DMV refusal hearing. See NY VTL § 1194(2)(b). Further, if the driver, after being sufficiently warned about the consequences associated with refusing, nevertheless, persistently refuses, the refusal can be used by the prosecution at trial. See NY VTL § 1194(2)(f).

New York Mortgage Fraud

September 1, 2009 | Jasmine Hernandez

Mortgage Fraud has taken center stage in Westchester County Courts and around New York State. This national problem has taken on extra prominence in New York where property values are high. As a criminal defense law firm that has handled many mortgage fraud cases including headline making cases we are seeing an increased number of cases and increased enforcement by law enforcement authorities.

Indeed, in connection with a high profile mortgage fraud case that this firm is involved with, the Westchester County District Attorney’s Office announced the formation of a Mortgage Fraud Unit to investigate and prosecute mortgage fraud in Westchester County. The Westchester County case resulted in the arrest of 8 people, 6 of whom were mortgage professionals and two attorneys.

Mortgage Fraud can take on many different flavors. The Westchester case is alleged to involve “Equity Stripping” which is a way of stealing the equity from a person facing foreclosure. Other cases can involve appraisal fraud, falsely preparing mortgage applications, using straw buyers with good credit to purchase properties, “flipping” properties from one buyer to another, identity theft or a combination of these practices.

TILEM & CAMPBELL IN THE NEWS – COMMENTING ON THE TACONIC PARKWAY CASE

August 5, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

Senior partner, Peter H. Tilem, appeared on the five o’clock news earlier this evening commenting on the Taconic Parkway fatal collision that left the driver and seven others dead. The piece appeared on channel 7’s Eyewitness news shortly after 5 pm. Mr. Tilem, who is a former senior prosecutor in the New York County District Attorney’s Office, was asked about the possibility of charges being brought against the husband of the woman who was allegedly intoxicated and indicated that it would not be sufficient if the husband was merely are of a history of substance abuse.

The full video is available and can be viewed at Tilem & Campbell’s media page along with other videos of partners Peter Tilem and Peter Tilem in the news.

NEW YORK GRAND JURY SYSTEM, AN INTRODUCTION

July 28, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

As a former Manhattan Prosecutor I have presented hundreds of cases to grand juries in New York. As a partner at a prominent criminal defense firm I have sat with clients inside the grand jury as they were questioned by prosecutors. With recent news reports about the a New York County Grand Jury considering charges against New York Giants stars Plaxico Burress and Antonio Pierce, it is important to understand exactly what a grand jury is and how it operates.

No person may be tried on a felony charge in New York unless a grand jury has considered evidence and voted an indictment or unless the person has waived indictment. The grand jury itself is made up of between 16 and 23 people. They are charged with the duty of hearing and examining evidence involving offenses or misconduct whether or not the misconduct is criminal. In order for a grand jury to vote an indictment 12 of the grand jurors must vote to indict.

The burden to vote for an indictment is low. A grand juror need only find that there is reasonable cause to believe that a person committed an offense. In laymans terms that means that a grand jury need only find sufficient evidence to accuse a person of having committed a felony. This is a very different standard than the proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” needed to convict someone of a crime.

NEW YORK CITY AUXILIARY COP ARRESTED FOR MACE

July 15, 2009 | Tilem & Associates

As outlined in our May 24, 2009 blog New York City bans certain items that are legal other places in New York State and most other places in our Country. New York City Auxiliary Police Officer Alexander Gonzalez found that out the hard way when he was arrested, while on duty, in Manhattan for possession of mace. Mace is one of those items which is illegal in New York City but was made legal in New York State in 1996.

New York City Auxiliary Police Officers are neither police officers or peace officers under New York Law and therefore are not entitled to possess any weapons that civilians are not also entitled to possess. Senior partner, Peter H. Tilem was interviewed for an article written about the case today.

Tilem & Campbell handles a large number of gun and weapons charges in New York and has seen an increase in overly aggressive enforcement of minor weapons violations in New York City for items such as Mace and knives.

US SUPREME COURT RULES THAT DEFENDANTS HAVE RIGHT TO CROSS EXAMINE CRIMINALISTS

June 26, 2009 | Jasmine Hernandez

The United States Supreme Court ruled yesterday, that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to cross-examine the scientists who prepare reports which are introduced at trial. The list of scientists would include chemists who test for the presence of controlled substances, fingerprint analysts and ballistics experts as well as many others. Although the ruling is an important one for the rights of those accused of crimes the ruling is likely to have little impact in New York where State laws already gives defense lawyers the right to cross-examine scientific witnesses.

The ruling is an extension of the 2004 Supreme Court decision Crawford v. Washington which limited the permissible uses of hearsay in criminal trials under the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause. The Supreme Court seems to be expressing continued concerned over the use of hearsay (out of Court statements) in criminal trials.

If you or a loved one stand accused of a crime or have been convicted of a crime based upon hearsay, contact one of the experienced criminal defense lawyers at Tilem & Campbell.