New York Criminal Attorney Blog

TILEM & CAMPBELL IS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT SENIOR PARTNER HAS EARNED THE HIGHEST RATING FROM LAWYER RATING SERVICE AVVO

September 9, 2010 | Tilem & Associates

Tilem & Campbell is pleased to announce that Senior Partner Peter H. Tilem, Esq. has earned the highest rating from lawyer rating service AVVO. Peter Tilem earned the maximum rating of 5 out of 5 in each of the rating categories which include experience, industry recognition and professional conduct and received a rating of 10 out of 10 overall, which AVVO ranks as “Superb.” Mr. Tilem is admitted to practice before the Courts of the States of New York and Connecticut, the Federal Courts in the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York, the District of Connecticut and the the District of Columbia as well as the United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit and the United States Supreme Court.

AVVO is a website that profiles and rates attorneys throughout the country in an effort to assist individuals who wish to hire an attorney. The rating agency has been sued by disgruntled attorneys in the past unhappy with their ratings but is widely believed to be useful in assisting the public in locating qualified lawyers.

Peter H Tilem

ADD HANDCUFFS TO THE LONG LIST OF ITEMS THAT ARE ILLEGAL IN NEW YORK CITY

September 2, 2010 | Jasmine Hernandez

In our May 24, 2009 blog entitled “New York City Bans Items that are Common and Lawful Most Other Places in New York State and in the Country” we detailed a long laundry list of items that are illegal in New York City, all of which are defined in the New York City Administrative Code sec 10-131. Items on our original list included mace, ammunition, imitation guns, assault weapons, rifles and ammunition feeding devices (gun clips or magazines). I left handcuffs off that list because I had never seen anyone arrested or summoned for possession of handcuffs. However, this office was recently contacted by a person who received a summons for possessing handcuffs in violation of New York City Administrative Code Sec 10-147.

Sec 10-147 makes it unlawful to possess handcuffs, thumb cuffs, leg irons and even flexible disposable handcuffs. Violation of 10-147 carries a maximum penalty of 10 days in jail and/or a $200 fine. There are numerous exceptions to this law such as possession by police officers, peace officers, military officers, police officers from other states carrying out their official duties in this State, licensed security guards and private investigators acting in the course of their job or while traveling to or from their job and many others. Kinky sex, which was the excuse that this person who was ticketed recently gave, is not one of the authorized exceptions.

In addition, there has been a lot written in this blog and a lot of press about the expansive definition being used, particularly in New York City of gravity knives and we have written about the aggressive enforcement of knife laws in New York City.

SPEED TRAP ON HENRY HUDSON PARKWAY REOPENS

August 28, 2010 | Jasmine Hernandez

New York speeding tickets are a dime a dozen but the speed trap on the Henry Hudson parkway north between the George Washington Bridge and about 1/2 mile before the Henry Hudson Bridge is just inexplicable. The speed limit is 35 miles per hour in the vicinity of Fort Tryon Park while it is 50 mph on the identical stretch of highway heading south bound and 50 mph before and after this stretch between the George Washington Bridge and the Henry Hudson Bridge.

Without any explanation several months ago the speed limit signs were changed to 50 mph on this stretch of highway and then just as mysteriously went back to 35 mph within the last several days. Of course, the New York City Police are aggressively enforcing the new speed limit.

To add to the absurdity, the speed limit goes up to 50 mph about 1/2 mile before the speed limit suddenly drops to only 10 mph just before the Henry Hudson Toll Plaza.

ROD BLAGOJEVICH CONVICTED OF LYING TO THE FBI LYING TO LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN BE A VERY BAD IDEA

August 18, 2010 | Jasmine Hernandez

Rod Blagojevich was the lasted in a line of high profile people to be convicted of lying to law enforcement even though juries fail to convict them of the underlying crime. In the latest case former Illinois governor Blagojevich was convicted of lying to the FBI even though a federal jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict on the underlying federal corruption charges. This situation is reminiscent of the Martha Stewart case in which Martha Stewart was tried and convicted of Obstruction of Justice and lying to investigators even though she was not charged or convicted of insider trading. Martha Stewart was eventually sentenced to a prison sentence in that case.

Although Obstruction of Justice, perjury or lying to the police charges are very rare in New York state Courts they are much more common in federal courts where making a false statement to federal law enforcement can lead to a federal felony charge. 18 USC 1001 which makes it a federal felony to make any materially false or misleading statement to federal agents is punishable by up to 5 years in prison. In addition, evidence of making false statements to law enforcement or otherwise mislead federal agents or obstructing justice can be used to enhance a sentence by adding two points to a persons Federal Sentence Guideline calculation under 3C1.1 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines.

Individuals who are questioned by police or federal law enforcement such as the FBI, DEA, BATFE have constitutional rights under both the United States Constitution and the New York State Constitution to remain silent and/or speak to an attorney before answering questions. This is an important constitutional right. People who are questioned by the police can often become nervous especially if they may have committed a crime or if they have not interacted with law enforcement in the past.

FINAL NOTICE – NEW YORK DWI CONVICTION REQUIRES IGNITION INTERLOCK INSTALLATION STARTING TOMORROW

August 13, 2010 | Jasmine Hernandez

As we have previously reported in our May 7, 2009, January 18, 2010 and July 26, 2010 blogs, the installation of ignition interlock devices will be come mandatory on all Driving While Intoxicated convictions effective tomorrow, August 15, 2010.

These devices are expensive to install, require monthly monitoring and can be embarrassing to explain. DWI’s, DUI’s and DWAI’s are serious offenses that require serious criminal attorneys who know the science and the law behind DWI cases. Besides the mandatory ignition interlock device and the mandatory revocation of your license, offenders face probation or jail and severe fines and surcharges.

As we approach Labor Day, this is a good time to remind people not to drink and drive. If you or a loved one are arrested, charged or questioned about a DWI or other alcohol related incident including Vehicular Assault or Vehicular Manslaughter contact the law firm of Tilem & Campbell.

Peter Tilem August 10th Radio Broadcast

August 11, 2010 | Tilem & Associates

Peter Tilem‘s appearance on the Johnny Mandolin radio show went well yesterday. All types of criminal cases were discussed including DWI, speeding, New York’s crack down on possession of knives, gun cases and the criminal justice system as a whole. The show is available on demand at www.centannibroadcasting.com.

New York Criminal Defense Lawyer Peter Tilem on the Radio

August 10, 2010 | Tilem & Associates

Senior partner Peter H. Tilem will be on the radio this evening speaking about New York knife laws and some of the recent cases involving knife charges. Mr. Tilem will be appearing from 7-8pm on the Johnny Mandolin show and you can listen live or listen to a recording of the show at www.centannibroadcasting.com.

Tilem & Campbell Beats Assault Case Based Upon the Lack of Probable Cause for an Arrest

August 6, 2010 | Jasmine Hernandez

New York criminal defense law firm, Tilem & Campbell scored a major victory on a Rockland County Assault case when an Orangetown Judge dismissed the case after a suppression and probable cause hearing. The defendant had been charged with Assault in the Third Degree based upon an altercation that occurred in December 2009. The defendant had faced up to one year and jail on the “A” misdemeanor and had already been suspended from his job as a result of the incident and the charges.

http://www.tilemlawfirm.com/lawyer-attorney-1282538.html had filed a pre-trial motion back in May asking the Court to suppress statements and/or hold a suppression and probable cause hearing. The Hearing was held on July 28, 2010 and one investigator from the New York State Police testified. On cross-examination by Mr. Tilem the investigator admitted that the defendant had been attacked by the victim using eyeglasses as a weapon, that the victim was the initial aggressor and that he had probable cause to arrest the victim but chose not to arrest him.

In a decision dated August 3, 2010, the Judge ruled that the District Attorney’s Office failed to establish probable cause for the arrest and dismissed the Assault in the Third Degree charge.

ENDANGERING THE WELFARE OF A CHILD [PL § 260.10] – WHAT AGE CAN A CHILD BE LEFT HOME ALONE IN NEW YORK?

August 1, 2010 | Tilem & Associates

Leaving a young child home alone can and often does lead to a parent being charged with Endangering the Welfare of a Child under the New York Penal Law. But at what is age is a child old and mature enough to be left home alone in New York? While some prosecutors choose to charge parents who leave young children (and even teenagers) home alone with Endangering the Welfare of a Child, the reality is, there is no set age in New York for a child to be left alone. The determination is based upon several factors including the age of the child, the maturity of the child and the length of time the child is left alone.
In fact, the City Court of Mt. Vernon has held that leaving a six-year-old child at home alone for one hour during the night, without more, is not criminal and does not support a charge of Endangering the Welfare of a Child. (See People v. Seward, 173 Misc. 2d 1020 (City Ct. Mt. Vernon 1997). The Seward decision cited Augustine v. Berger, 88 Misc. 2d 487 (1976), where the Suffolk County Supreme Court held that leaving a one and a two year old alone for a half hour at night did not amount to maltreatment under the Family Court Act. Similarly, the Kings County Criminal Court has held that leaving a five, seven, twelve and thirteen year old home alone without more supporting facts is insufficient to support a charge of Endangering the Welfare of a Child. People v. Smith, 178 Misc. 2d 350 (1998).
For more information about this, and other criminal law issues, please contact Tilem & Campbell toll-free at 1-877-377-8666 or visit the web at www.tilemandcampbell.com.

NEW LAW MAKES IGNITION INTERLOCK MANDATORY ON ALL NEW YORK DWI CONVICTIONS

July 26, 2010 | Jasmine Hernandez

A new law which takes effect on August 15, 2010, makes the installation of an ignition interlock system mandatory on all convictions in New York for DWI charges. The devices which are required to be installed at the defendant’s expense will not permit the car to start if the operator registers a .025 or above of alcohol in their blood. The new law will effect the approximately 25,000 people per yera who are convicted of drinking and driving.

The law first became effective December 18, 2009 as reported in our prior blog and starting in little more than 2 weeks, the aspect of the law requiring ignition interlocks will become mandatory.

The cost of installation of an interlock device is expected to be about $100 and the required monthly monitoring will cost between $70 and $100 dollars per month. The devise will require the motorist to blow into the device to get the vehicle started and require that the driver blow into the device at regular intervals.