February 2010 Archives

February 20, 2010

Port Chester Criminal Court

Brought to you by the Law Office of Michael H. Joseph PLLC

The Port Chester Criminal Court is located at

350 North Main Street
Port Chester, N.Y.10573

The Port Chester criminal court handles traffic offenses, misdemeanor criminal charges and pre-indictment felony charges. For felony cases, if there is an indictment, the case will be transferred from the Port Chester criminal court to the Westchester Superior Court in White Plains.

The Port Chester Criminal Court usually hears criminal cases on Mondays and Thursdays. Court starts at 9:30 a.m. Non-criminal traffic offenses are usually heard at the Court's night session.

Continue reading "Port Chester Criminal Court" »

February 18, 2010

THE WHITE PLAINS CITY CRIMINAL COURT

This Page Is Brought to You By

The Law Office of Michael H. Joseph PLLC
Experienced White Plains Criminal Defense Attorneys

THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL PAGE OF THE CITY OF WHITE PLAINS AND IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY


The White Plains City Criminal Court handles all misdemeanor level criminal cases based on arrests for crimes that occur within the City of White Plains. The White Plains Criminal Court also handles the pre-indictment proceedings for all felonies that occur in White Plains.

The Contact Information for the White Plains Criminal Court is as follows:

White Plains City Court
77 Lexington Avenue
White Plains, N.Y. 10601
(914) 824-5675

Frequently Asked Questions:

1. When do I have to be there?

The Court is open Monday through Friday and usually begins around 9:30 a.m.


2. What is a DAT
Many low level criminal cases in White Plains begin with a desk appearance ticket (DAT). This is a ticket requiring you to appear before the White Plains Criminal Court for an arraignment of a criminal charge.

3. What is arraignment?

Arraignment is the first time a criminal case is on. Usually you will enter a formal plea. For most criminal defendants, this will be a plea of not guilty.

4. What happens after arraignment?
The case will usually be scheduled for a conference date to determine whether the matter can be resolved by plea bargain or whether a trial is required.

5. Which Courtroom do I go to?
If your criminal case is on for an arraignment (first appearance) or a conference, you will be in Courtroom A. If your case is on for trial, your case will be in Courtroom B.

Continue reading "THE WHITE PLAINS CITY CRIMINAL COURT" »

February 5, 2010

New York- Unsealing Grand Jury Minutes for Prosecution of Malicious Prosecution Case

Michael Joseph won an important decision concerning the availability of grand jury minutes to a Plaintiff in a malicious prosecution action.

To establish a claim for malicious prosecution, a plaintiffs must show that (1)the defendant initiated a prosecution against plaintiffs, (2) the matter terminated in plaintiffs' favor, (3) there was no probable cause for the criminal proceeding and (4) the proceeding was motivated by actual malice.

Where the Plaintiff has been indicted, the defendants always claim that the Plaintiff is unable to demonstrate a lack of probable cause because an indictment creates a presumption of probable cause. However, where an indictment was the product of fraud, perjury, and the suppression of evidence a Plaintiff sufficiently rebuts any presumption of probable cause

Therefore, to prove his case, malicous prosecution Plaintiffs must establish what occurred in the grand jury. This poses a problem because the transcripts are automatically sealed.

In a ground breaking decision in the case of People v. Manganiello, Michael Joseph, convinced the Court to unseal the grand jury minutes because the Plaintiff had a compelling need for disclosure of the grand jury minutes to rebut the presumption of probable cause associated with a grand jury indictment. While C.P.L. § 190.25 states that grand jury proceedings are secret, the secrecy of grand jury minutes is not absolute. People v. Di Napoli, 27 N.Y.2d 229. An interested party may bring an ex parte application for disclosure of grand jury minutes. See Aswad v. Hynes, 80 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dep't 1991).While C.P.L. § 190.25 states that grand jury proceedings are secret, the secrecy of grand jury minutes is not absolute. People v. Di Napoli, 27 N.Y.2d 229. An interested party may bring an ex parte application for disclosure of grand jury minutes. See Aswad v. Hynes, 80 A.D.2d 382 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dep't 1991).

Grand jury minutes may be provided to a civil litigant where there is a compelling and particularized need for access. Ruggiero v. Fahey, 103 A.D.2d 65 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dep't 1984); Richburg v Morgenthau 184 App Div 2d 316 ( N.Y.A.D. 1 Dep't 1992). In the Manganiello case, the Court held that allegations that certain witnesses committed perjury before the grand jury were sufficient to establish a compelling need for access.

February 4, 2010

New York Criminal Law Defense of Assault Charges

fight 2.jpg As a Westchester criminal defense attorney, Michael Joseph has handled the criminal defense of cases in the Courts of Yonkers, White Plains, New Rochelle, Greenburgh, Elmsford, Mount Kisco, Mount Vernon, Rye, Sleepy Hollow and Irvington.

As a Westchester criminal defense lawyer, Michael Joseph has extensive experience handling assault cases. The basic level assault charge, which is a misdemeanor is Penal Law § 120.00 [1] which states that a person is guilty of assault in the third degree when he intentionally causes a physical injury to another person. As such, it is essential that a complaining witness have sustained an injury to establish a prima facie case of assault. Often, in Westchester, criminal charges for assault are brought in the Courts of Yonkers, White Plains, New Rochelle, Greenburgh, Elmsford, Mount Kisco, Rye, Sleepy Hollow and Irvington for cases that do not qualify as an assault.

For a case to qualify as an assault, there must be a "physical injury", which is defined as impairment of "physical condition or substantial pain." In any New York assault case, the complaining witness must supply a supporting deposition which alleges impairment, or "substantial pain". Impairment of physical condition is defined as "a loss, loss of use, or derangement of any body part, organ system, or organ function. Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (5th ed, 2000). A mere cursory statement that the complaintant suffered "substantial pain", is insufficient to support an allegation for assault in the third degree. "Substantial pain" has been strictly construed by the criminal courts and if an objective level of injury is not demonstrated, the charges must be dismissed as a matter of law.

The criminal courts have routinely held that minor injuries are insufficient to constitute an assault. Minor superficial soft tissue injuries are not sufficient to establish an injury sufficient to support a charge of assault in the third degree. In re Jose B., 47 A.D.3d 461 ( N.Y.A.D. 1 Dep't. 2008). In People v Jimenez, 55 N.Y.2d 895 (1982), the court dismissed a complaint of assault where the complaining witness sustained only a one centimeter cut above the lip. In People v. Ruttenbur, 112 A.D.2d 13 (1985), superficial scratches were held insufficient to sustain a charge of assault in the third degree. In People v. Contreras, 108 A.D.2d 627 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dep't 1985), the court held that a small abrasion requiring one stitch was insufficient to satisfy the injury element of assault in the third degree. In Baksh, the Court reversed a conviction for lack of an injury, where, the victim had only cuts with no stitches. People v. Baksh, 43 A.D.3d 1072 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dep't 2007). Here, the alleged injury was less serious than the injury that the Court found to be insufficient in Contreras, where the complaining witness required stitches. Here, there were no stitches, as such, the laceration is insufficient to establish an injury which caused substantial pain.

The claim that the complaintent suffered a bruise and swelling is also insufficient to support a charge of assault. A minor soft tissue trauma is insufficient to support an accusation of assault in the third degree. In re Jose B., 47 A.D.3d 461 ( N.Y.A.D. 1 Dep't. 2008). A mere allegation that a complainant experienced swelling is insufficient to establish an injury. People v. Richmond, 36 A.D.3d 721 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dep't. 2007). In People v. Oquendo, 134 A.D.2d 203 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dep't 1987), the court held that bruises from punches without evidence of the blows' after affects are insufficient to support a conviction of assault.

Likewise, the complaining witness has failed to establish that she sustained an injury capable of causing pain that rose to the level of that required by the statute. Nor has she made a sufficient factual allegation of substantial pain. Where the complaining witness states she had severe pain, this is merely conclusory and unsupported by any facts. Where there is insufficient evidence from which a jury could infer that he suffered substantial pain, the charges should be dismissed.

Where the complaining witness fails to state the duration of the pain or that pain killing medication was necessary, they have failed to establish an injury. People v. Richmond, 36 A.D.3d 721 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dep't. 2007). A mere allegation that a complainant experienced swelling is insufficient to establish an injury. In Matter of Philip A. 49 N.Y. 2d 198, 200 (1980), the court held that a red mark and some degree of pain from a punch in the face does not constitute "substantial pain". Similarly, the court in People v. McDowell, 28 N.Y.2d 373 (1971) held that a blackened eye without any suggestion of pain is insufficient to establish "physical injury". Likewise a mere allegation that a complaining witness had pain was insufficient where they treated their aches and pain with ice, Tylenol, and iodine, and stayed home from work for three or four days. People v. Briggs, 285 A.D.2d 651, (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dep't. 2001).

Continue reading "New York Criminal Law Defense of Assault Charges" »