 |
I understand that for many people, an arrest can be as traumatic
as a serious illness or other tragic life event. For that reasons, I treat
ever client personally and give my personal attention to their case. Unlike
some large firms might do, I treat you as a person, not a number or "type."
This understanding allows for a better attorney-client relationship. In
addition, you get the top-notch service that you need based on the facts
and circumstances of your individual case. I bring nearly 20 years of
trial and litigation experience to the table and the knowledge I've amassed
during this time is always used to your advantage.
The police often lie. This
is an absolute fact. Experienced practitioners know this to be true from
first hand experience. It may not be true in every case, but it is something
we always look out for. The question is how to convince the judge, jury
or prosecutor that the police arent telling the truth. Oftentimes,
this comes down to showing that either that there are other witnesses
who contradict the police and who have no bias or reason to lie or to
show that the police testimony, on its own, in ridiculous or inconsistent
with his/her own statements in the past.
Many searches and seizures are illegal.
While it has become easier over the years for the police to search your
person, car or even your home, there are still constitutional limits on
when, where and how law enforcement can conduct searches. Oftentimes,
the police try to coerce a person into consenting to a search
of their person, car or home by suggesting that by forcing the officer
to obtain a warrant is a useless act and will only make things worse.
This is not true. At other times, the police stop cars in drug prone
neighborhoods because they dont like the look of the occupants or
because they have out of state license plates. This is not a proper basis
for the stop of a vehicle. If you are pulled over or if the police ask
your permission to search anywhere, remember that you have the right to
refuse. The constitutional principles against illegal search and seizure
apply to all law enforcement agents.
Admitting your guilt will not make
things go easier for you. The old adage is that if you confess
earlier, the cops will make the case better for you. The natural tendency
learned from childhood is that if we admit our mistakes, we will not be
punished as harshly or we may even be absolved completely. This rule,
while true in a family setting, is not true when dealing with law enforcement.
By admitting your guilt prior to speaking with an attorney, you are only
making the prosecutors job easier. The right to remain silent should
be exercised in every situation where a person is questioned by the police
as a suspect, whether you are in custody or not. If you have valuable
information to tell the police, do so only under the guidance of an experienced
attorney in a setting where those statements cannot be used against you
and where you will get credit for making them. However, more
often than not, a person charged with a crime should save his statement
for the witness stand, should he choose to testify.
Identification testimony is often
mistaken and leads to wrongful convictions. Most prosecutions are
based, in part or whole, upon the testimony of eyewitnesses. In the typical
robbery or other street crime, a person gets a fleeting glimpse at the
perpetrator and then offers a description to the police. That person is
then views the suspect in police custody a short time later under often
suggestive circumstances. Sometimes, the scant description offered the
police is different than the suspects actual appearance, yet the
person makes a positive identification. Such identification procedures
have often been criticized by judges, including the US Supreme Court,
scholars, psychologists and other experts. Yet, eyewitness testimony can
be persuasive to a jury. The function of defense counsel is to show that
the eyewitness is making a legitimate mistake due to the brief period
of observation, the stressful conditions, poor lighting conditions and
the variance between the vague description given and the actual appearance
of the person arrested. Hopefully, through probing and forceful cross
examination, the jury will recognize the fragilities of such evidence
and not base a conviction solely upon it.
Federal crimes are prosecuted differently
and have different penalties. Federal law enforcement agencies
work differently than local ones do. The FBI, DEA and other US agencies
typically operate long-term investigations of serious crimes that lead
to the arrest and prosecution of many persons in what is often categorized
as a conspiracy. Typically, the agency learns of a group of people engaged
in illegal activity, whether it is organized crime, narcotics trafficking,
counterfeiting, money laundering or producing false documents, from an
informant. This person is typically someone who once worked (or continues
to work) within the group and who want to cooperate with the authorities
to reduce the prison time he may have to serve for his own crimes. A person
in federal custody will quickly learn that if he/she cooperates with the
government, their problems can be solved much more favorably than if they
remain silent. Offering information to the government should only be done
after speaking to your attorney. But if you do render substantial
assistance to the government, the prosecutor must inform the court
and you will be eligible for a vastly reduced sentence in spite of any
mandatory minimum or guidelines requirement. This practice is not as wide-spread
in state court due to the differences in sentencing statutes and the nature
of the offences prosecuted by state authorities.
Plea bargains are more often controlled
by prosecutors than judges. In New York State, the District Attorney
controls what crimes a person can be charged with. While it is the grand
jurys function to return an indictment charging those crimes, the
DA presents the evidence and asks for an indictment for specific crimes.
Each crime is classified as an E, D, C, B, A-2 or A-1 felony. Each classification
has certain mandatory minimum and maximum sentences that must be imposed.
For example, in most drug sale cases, the person is charged with a B felony.
The mandatory minimum is one to three years in prison. To obtain a sentence
less than that, the DA must reduce the charge to a C felony or below.
There are also legal limits on how many levels down a prosecutor can reduce
a charge. There are different limits for violent and non-violent crimes.
In federal cases, there are also classifications, but they are based upon
federal sentencing guidelines which determine a persons sentence.
There are also certain mandatory minimums, especially for drug crimes,
for many federal offences. Within the range permitted by the law, the
judge is required to then impose sentence for the crime the person is
found guilty. Sometimes, judges have no choice but to follow the law and
impose a harsher sentence than may be appropriate for a particular individual.
Juvenile offenders are often treated
harsher than adults. Children under the age of 16 are most often
prosecuted in New York State Family Court unless the child is charged
with a very serious offense, such as rape, armed robbery or murder. While
it would seem that childrens rights would be more expansive than
those of an adult, the opposite is actually true. In Family Court, a child
charged with a crime is either released on his own recognizance or detained.
If the child is detained, there is no right to post bail. When the childs
case comes up for trial, there is no right to a jury, only a judge who
makes the finding of guilt. How can children be denied these inalienable
constitutional rights? It is done on the basis of a legal fiction: that
when a child is found guilty, he is not sentenced to jail.
Rather, the courts have found that placement in a juvenile
detention facility is not the same as jail and so, there is no right to
a jury trial or to be bailed out pending that trial. I view this as a
fiction because when a child is sent to a facility, he is taken against
his will to a place where he will be kept apart from his family and friends,
forced to live a certain way without the choices available to the rest
of us. Sometimes, his freedom of movement within the facility is highly
restricted, sometimes his door is locked. For these reasons, juvenile
cases must be taken very seriously by parents and lawyers alike.
If youve been in an accident, AT A MINIMUM, you can
receive payment for resulting medical expenses and your lost earnings.
In New York State, people involved in automobile accidents can receive
insurance coverage for medical expenses incurred as a result of the accident
through one of the parties no fault insurance carriers. The
best thing to do is to have your attorney handle this aspect of the case
for you. I do so at no extra charge in most cases. Basically, you can
apply for and receive coverage for your medical expenses regardless of
whether you yourself have health insurance. In addition, no fault pays
your lost wages for time missed from work as a result of the accident.
If the insurance adjuster calls you
before you speak to an attorney, tell them you cannot speak at this time.
It is quite common that within days, if not hours, of your accident, an
insurance adjuster will call you to ask you detailed questions about how
the accident occurred and the nature of your injuries. Often, the adjusters
purpose in asking these questions is to catch you off guard and perhaps
intimidate you into speaking about things before you have had a chance
to think them through or consult with an attorney. The best course of
action is to tell the adjuster you cannot speak right now and to then
contact an experienced attorney to help you. What you say in that initial
interview may well limit you in terms of any future monetary award to
which you may be entitled. In fact, the adjuster may even offer you money
to settle the case without an attorney. They usually do so when they know
that an attorney will gauge the full value of the case and demand considerably
more.
You are also entitled to damages
for your pain and suffering due to the accident.
If you have been in an automobile accident and you suffer any permanent
injury such as a fracture, herniated disc or other serious physical injury,
you will recover money for your pain and suffering. What people dont
know is that New York law does not allow for monetary recovery for injuries
which are not serious. If your injury isnt serious, you can only
recover what is paid for by no fault. However, there are exceptions to
this general rule and you should always consult experienced counsel before
you do anything. Needless to say, it is my goal to always obtain the maximum
possible monetary award for my clients. You should never settle for anything
less.
In virtually all cases where you have been injured due to
someone elses negligence, you are entitled to recover your lost
wages, medical expenses and damages for pain and suffering.
If youve fallen down over some debris left in your building, if
youve slipped on a crack the sidewalk, if youve tripped on
a slippery surface in a restaurant, you may well be entitled to money
damages for your injury. The question to ask is, was the owner of
the property negligent in maintaining it, repairing it or building it?
If someone elses neglect, carelessness or ignorance caused your
injury, you may well be entitled to collect damages.
It is impossible to truthfully and accurately say how much
you will be compensated until a complete investigation of all facts is
done.
No matter how experienced a lawyer claims to be, there is no way of telling
you how much you will recover until all the facts are in. And even when
they are, the amount will vary based upon the particular circumstances
of the case, who the insurance company is, who your lawyer is. That is
why you need to choose an attorney who will fight for you and not settle
for less that what you should get.
In a divorce case, the fault of the spouses is
not relevant to how the marital property will be divided.
The law assigns no financial relevance whatsoever to the fact that your
spouse cheated on you or that you cheated on him/her. While adultery provides
grounds for divorce, it does not mean the adulterer pays more support
or alimony. When a Court is asked to divide the assets owned by a couple,
it is done so on an equitable basis. This term has been defined
to mean many things, but basically it gives the judge the authority to
take into account all the important monetary considerations such as the
relative earning capacity of the parties, the needs of the parties and
any special circumstances that are important and then split the assets
on a finding of what would be fair under all the circumstances.
Spousal maintenance, formally known as alimony
is most often granted when the duration of the marriage exceeds ten years.
While this is more a rule of thumb than law, it is true for most cases.
Courts generally take the view that one spouse only has a continuing legal
obligation to support the other if the marriage is of such long duration
that it would likely cause that spouse to seek public assistance or if
the spouses standard of living could not be maintained in the same
approximate manner as during the marriage. Courts also take into account
whether the non-working spouse has given up career opportunities to work
in the home and whether this was encouraged or supported by the other
spouse.
Martial assets, such as brokerage accounts, real
estate and even professional licenses are subject to distribution between
the spouses.
Im sure most people in a divorce case expect
that their marital assets would be divided based upon some formula devised
by the court. What many people dont know is that even assets
like professional licenses (i.e., law, medicine, teaching, etc.) can be
valued by an expert and then in an equitable way divided.
For example, a doctor may have to pay his/her spouse a percentage of income
derived from the medical license for a specified number of years. Even
licenses which may typically prove not as lucrative as law or medicine
are subject to the same treatment.
For practical purposes, a marital asset can be
defined as any asset acquired during the marriage except by gift or inheritance.
These are the assets which are subject to the rule
of equitable distribution. There are other specific exceptions
set forth in the law, but these are the two most common ones. When defining
what is meant by acquired courts have held that even if a
piece of property is purchased before marriage, its increase in value
during the marriage can be subject to equitable distribution.
The custody of children is based upon what is in the childs
best interests.
The mother does not always get custody of the children. In the event of
a dispute over custody, the court will determine what is best for the
child. In such cases law guardians, who are attorneys selected by the
court to represent the child, will assist in determining what is in his/her
best interest. In addition, the Court can order that the parties undergo
psychiatric testing and be interviewed by social workers as an aid to
determining what is in the childs best interest. When all this is
done, if there is no agreement between all parties, including the law
guardian, the Court will decide whether custody should be vested in the
mother, father or jointly. However, the idea of joint custody is somewhat
misleading. The child can generally only reside with one parent for practical
reasons such as schooling, stability, location of friends and relatives
and the parties work obligations. In addition, one party will always
need to have tie breaking authority, meaning that in the event
the parties disagree about an important medical, educational, financial
or other decision, one parent has to make the final call. For this reason,
custody can never really be equal.
In New York State, child support is presumptively
17% of the parties income for one child and 25% for two children.
In practical terms, the non-custodial parent usually
pays child support to the custodial parent in the above range. However,
it is not uncommon in some circumstances for the court to deviate from
the presumptive amount of child support. In addition, the non-custodial
parent can be ordered to pay for things like private schooling, college
tuition, medical expenses and other irregular or extraordinary expenses.
In most states, as in New York State, an employee can be
terminated from his/her job for any reason or for no reason whatsoever.
The important exception to this general rule is that you can't be fired
because of your age, race, sex, religion or national origin. The federal
laws prohibiting this are the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act (ADEA). Separate state and New York City laws also protect
against such discrimination.
Sexual harassment falls under the heading of discrimination
in employment based upon sex. This is the most common form of discrimination
in the work place and until recently was simply accepted as an unavoidable
fact of life in the work world. Even though most people know this practice
is illegal, it is still rampant in the workplace. Both women and men can
be the victims of sexual harassment. Though the courts have recently narrowed
the definition of sexual harassment, many forms of behavior in the workplace
can fall under the new definition. In order for the conduct to be considered
illegal the harassment must be in the form of a quid pro quo proposition
(i.e., your boss insists that you succumb to his sexual advances or you
will be denied a promotion or be terminated) or as a "hostile environment"
claim. The latter type of harassment is more common and usually consists
of a work environment which is filled with sexually charged language and
conduct to the point where it becomes both "pervasive" (meaning
it is constant) and "severe" (which means the individual harassing
acts are significant).
The next most common form of employment discrimination is
discrimination based upon age. Many employers are all to eager to discard
an older employee who is entitled to increased pay and benefits in favor
of a newer, younger worker who can be compensated at a lesser rate and
who is less likely to avail himself of pension and other benefits which
vest only after a certain period of employment. Firing an employee using
age as one of the reasons is illegal.
Needless to say, discrimination in all forms still exists,
including racial, ethnic and creed based firings. As will all forms of
discrimination, the hard part of the case is proving that one of these
impermissible factors was a basis for the termination. If you were fired
because of your race and because of a performance related issue, that
is still illegal.
The first step in addressing discrimination in employment
is usually to file a complaint with the appropriate federal, state or
local agency that is authorized to investigate such matters and to take
action. In many cases, a settlement can be negotiated at this stage prior
to bringing the case in court. However, if that does not happen, the agency
will issue you a "right to sue letter" after the investigation
is complete. This will allow you to bring the case in court and is necessary
in some instances before you can do so.
If you think you have been the victim of discrimination
in employment you may be entitled to significant money damages. Should
you lose your job due to sexual harassment or age discrimination, you
will be entitled to back pay (all the money you would have made at the
job prior to the settlement) and perhaps even "front pay" (the
money you would have made projected for a reasonable time into the future).
The first step to take is to consult an attorney.
Don't make a complaint without speaking to an experienced attorney first.
You might say or do something that compromises your standing to bring
a legal action or makes your job situation worse. There is no harm speaking
to an attorney at the earliest sign of trouble.
|
 |