new york

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.

If anyone has any explanation for this seemingly ridiculous speed trap please post a comment to this blog. I for one would love to know and so would the many motorists who received New York City traffic tickets in this area. In the meantime, if you drive on this stretch of New York City road be careful and pay close attention to the signs. A motorist who drives just 56 mph (believing that the speed limit is 50 mph) faces 6 points on their license if caught in this area. The 6 points brings all types of headaches such as the driver responsibility assessment and insurance headaches.

If you are ticketed in this area contact Tilem & Campbell or visit drsummons.com to learn about your options.

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.

The bottom line is that anyone who is contacted by the police, FBI or other law enforcement should learn their rights. Contact an experienced criminal defense attorney who can advise you of your rights and be with you through the process. Lying to law enforcement is simply not going to help and quite frankly may make the situation worse.

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‘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.

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.

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.tilemandcampbell.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.

Any experienced criminal defense lawyer should always explore suppression and probable cause issues in the criminal cases they handle. Pre-Trial hearings can be a valuable tool in winning criminal cases.

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.

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.

The cost and collateral consequences of DWI convictions in New York have increased dramatically over the last several years. Anyone arrested or charged for a DWI, DWAI or Driving While Ability Impaired by Drugs should contact an experienced DWI lawyer to discuss their options, possible defenses and the range of potential consequences.

New York criminal defense firm Tilem & Campbell, scored another big victory in a Queens gun possession case when the Queens District Attorney’s Office agreed to reduce the class “C” violent felony gun charge to Disorderly Conduct a non-criminal violation. The client who was arrested with the handgun inside LaGuardia Airport as he was about to board a flight was originally facing a mandatory minimum sentence of 3 and 1/2 years in a New York State Prison. The client will pay a $250 fine and have his record sealed.

The client was originally arrested after he attempted to check the pistol in his checked baggage at the airport and was apparently not aware of New York’s very strict gun laws. In New York, possession of a loaded firearm outside a person’s home or place of business carries a mandatory minimum of three and a half years in prison even for a first arrest. In addition, the pistol does not actually have to be loaded to be legally “loaded” simply possessing the ammunition and the gun capable of firing that ammunition at the same time is enough to constitute a “loaded firearm” under New York law.

This is the second such victory this year for Tilem & Campbell. Earlier this year, in March, Tilem & Campbell scored a disorderly conduct violation on another gun case from LaGuardia airport. Senior Partner Peter H. Tilem a former prosecutor, worked in the Firearms Trafficking Unit of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and has a tremendous amount of experience in handling New York gun cases and other types of New York weapons cases.

Travelers from other states to New York should be careful and take note of New York gun laws before bringing guns or other weapons into New York. Gun charges in New York are very serious and should be carefully examined before coming to New York. Anyone who is charged with a New York gun crime should contact an experienced handgun attorney.

If you cause serious physical injury to another person in New York while Driving While Intoxicated (VTL 1192(2), (3)) or Driving While Ability Impaired by Drugs (VTL 1192(4)), in addition to DWI charges, you may also face the more serious charge of Vehicular Assault in the Second Degree (Penal Law 120.03(1)). Vehicular Assault in the Second Degree is a Class E Felony for which you could be sentenced for up to four years in state prison.

For a driver to be guilty on Vehicular Assault in the Second Degree, the prosecution must prove not only that the driver was intoxicated by alcohol or impaired by the use of a drug or the combination of alcohol and any drug or drugs, but also that the intoxication and/or impairment was the cause of the serious physical injury to another. Of course, the prosecution must also prove a serious physical injury as well. (Penal Law 120.03(1)).

However, if a driver causes a serious physical injury to another while operating a vehicle while intoxicated or impaired by the use of drugs or the combination of drugs and alcohol, the law creates a rebuttable presumption that that the driver operated the vehicle in a manner that caused the serious physical injury to another. In other words, if you are Driving While Intoxicated or impaired by drugs and someone suffers a serious physical injury it is presumed that the serious physical injury was caused by how you drove the vehicle.

This presumption can be defeated however. For example, if you were sitting at red light intoxicated and your vehicle was rear-ended by another car resulting in serious physical injury to the other driver, it could hardly be argued that your operation of the vehicle while intoxicated (sitting at a red-light) caused the serious physical injury to the driver that drove into the rear of your stopped car.

A Driving While Intoxicated cases are serious. They are complex cases that require attorneys experienced in the law, science and procedures associated with DWI cases. It is in the complexity that skilled DWI attorneys can win. Driving While Intoxicated cases are even more serious where others are seriously injured. You could very well be facing serious felony charges such as Vehicular Assault in the Second Degree. If you are facing serious charges resulting from a DWI in New York you need to invest in a serious criminal defense law firm. For more information contact Tilem & Campbell toll free at 1-888-DWI-COUNSEL or visit us on the web at www.888DwiCounsel.com.