Blog

Most in Mineola might think that a charge of larceny would be fairly simple to either prove or disprove: either one stole something, or he or she did not. Yet as is the case with many areas of the law, fighting such an accusation is not always that simple. In some cases, one might have acted in a manner that he or she thought was completely legal (even at the advice of others), only to later face allegations that he or she stole something. Such is the claim being made by the mayor of Mount Vernon. The mayor is claims that he was acting on the advice of his legal counsel when he redirected $45,000 in inauguration committee funds as well as $12,000 in campaign funds. He says that both were meant to be compensation for work he put in campaigning. He also states that he followed proper procedure in recording the transactions, an assertion that is being disputed by the state’s Attorney General. The Attorney General claims that the mayor lied about the use of the money, using it to pay for his cars, his rent and personal travel expenses (among other things). While the mayor has ignored calls to resign, if convicted he would be removed from office. The first reaction that many may have when people deny any wrongdoing in cases such as this is to roll their eyes. Yet it should be remembered that people are innocent until proven otherwise, and deserving of the chance to refute any criminal allegations that are made against them. Those who may need help in mounting a defense to larceny charges may find it in the form of a seasoned criminal defense attorney. Source: Westchester Magazine “Mount Vernon Mayor Arrested on Charges of Grand Larceny: What You Need to Know” Zucker, Dave, Mar. 20, 2018

To the average New Yorker, it might seem that theft is a simple act, with a simple defense; either someone took something without permission or they did not. However, there may be an easy—or at least honest—explanation of why you have the item in your possession. Every case is different, but there are several defenses for theft or larceny. Returned property According to FindLaw, if you can show that you meant to return the item even as you took it, you may be able to make a case for intending only to borrow, or perhaps you simply forgot to return it. It is not uncommon to defend against theft charges in this manner. Sometimes, people will offer to return the item to prevent prosecution or to show remorse. Although its return will not alter the charges, prosecutors may be inclined to work out a plea deal or reduce penalties. Intoxicated During Larceny It may sound silly, but intoxication may be a viable defense if you can show that taking the item was just a mistake. When a person is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, they may be unable to fashion the intent to steal. For example, if you grab someone else’s purse as you leave a party, you may not have been aware of it if you were inebriated. Entrapment If you have been coaxed into stealing something that you would not have taken otherwise, you may be able to claim entrapment. This can happen if the one who entices you suggests the theft, all with the intent is to arrest and prosecute you. You Own the Item Perhaps you lent something to a friend a long time ago and both of you forgot about it until you saw it again and took it home. This can easily happen when neighbors borrow lawn tools and forget to return them, or maybe it was a pair of designer shoes. Whether it is an honest mistake, an error or simply reclaiming your property, you may have several reasons for taking something. If you are facing theft or other charges, you may want to consider consulting an experienced defense attorney. This article is informational only; it should not be considered legal advice.

When the seriousness of a penalty far outweighs the crime, there is clearly an issue at hand. Such is the case for countless New Yorkers who have been found guilty of larceny; some, unfortunately, have already faced major repercussions. These charges, while reasonable to a degree, can ultimately damage a person’s reputation, professional life and overall wellbeing. For some, the effects of these charges have recently been halted. Independent media outlet openDemocracy shared last week that New York has reduced its jail and prison population by 50 percent — with petit larceny on the list for adjustment within the system. One reason, according to openDemocracy, is that crime rates across the nation have plummeted. Once a hub for crime, New York now prides itself over this progress, and subsequently has debunked the popular idea that reductions in crime are a result of higher incarceration rates. The following small crimes can now result in a required community service project, counselling at a local clinic, assistance with career searches and other help with readjusting into society: Petit larceny Drug possession Trespassing Riding subway with a ticket openDemocracy adds that the punishment for avoiding this process of readjustment is also strict, but that the state is one of many in the hopes that the nation is at the end of a mass incarceration era. Although the state may be on the brink of change, there are some individuals still grappling with larceny charges. Findlaw outlines some common theft defenses, first noting that there are valid defenses even in cases where the facts that led to theft are evident. One defense for this crime is claim of right, in which the defendant establishes that they were the rightful owner of the property. Intoxication is another type of defense, in which an individual argues that intoxication prevented them from intentionally stealing the property. There are other defense options, as each situation may require unique solutions.

New York is easily known as one of the biggest shopping meccas in the world. Tourists and locals alike flock to its diverse and alluring shopping centers, but with this popularity comes the occasional shoplifting incident. While state laws work to deter shoppers from pocketing products, those found guilty of this crime can sometimes deal with the repercussions to exhausting lengths. Below are some accessible facts about shoplifting, including state laws and common defenses for theft charges. Findlaw lists the basics when it comes to shoplifting charges in the state, pointing out that multiple sides of an incident can often exist. Although theft accusations are serious, prosecutors must prove the crime took place. Otherwise known as larceny in New York, shoplifting can also result in a commercial burglary charge — devices used to disarm security tags, for example, could constitute as evidence of planned theft before entering the store. Penalties range from petit larceny to grand larceny, with fines of up to $5,000 or more depending on incident specifics. The penalties may be steep, but there are a number of options when it comes to making a defense to a shoplifting charge. Those defenses, as Psychology Today highlights in an article on shoplifting, can become complex. Unlike those who cope with addictions to stealing, some shoplift out of a need to support family or were victims of entrapment; others strive to defend shoplifting accustions as a result of one intoxicated night out on the town. Younger crowds may face peer pressure to steal, which Psychology Today notes is highly common. Some might argue that, in cases of poverty, there are alternative resources and programs that offer supplies, but accessing food and other items is not always a simple task. A shoplifting charge may seem an overwhelming mess to untangle, but the key lies in the proof — or lack thereof — that the theft took place.

What may happen by issuing a bad check in New York can depend on a lot of factors. Issuing a bad check can result in you charges of violating New York Penal Law 109.05. That is a class B misdemeanor. If convicted, you can receive a sentence of up to 90 days of incarceration and have to pay a fine. You can also lose a professional license which can implicate your livelihood even if your employer would not choose to terminate you. As such, although “just” a misdemeanor, you will want to address it immediately if you receive notice of charges against you. The state must prove certain elements Typically, a court may find you guilty of this charge if the state proves that you gave a check to someone while knowing that you did not have sufficient funds to cover it. You have to have had a belief, when you passed the check, that when the person you gave it to goes to cash or deposit it, that it will bounce and the bank will refuse it. That check then has to, in fact, bounce. Assumptions against you The court will generally assume, and legally can, that if you had insufficient funds in your account, that you knew about it. Also, if you wrote a check on an account that simply did not exist, the assumption is that you intended to commit this crime. Defenses to affirmatively plead in your answer There are a few defenses, however, that you must affirmatively plead to get the benefit of. For instance, if you made good on the check within 10 days after the bank decline it due to lack of funds, you may have a defense. Also, if you wrote the check on behalf of an employer, with signing authority, and were to receive no benefit yourself for passing the check and were only following orders, you may use that as an affirmative defense.

At one time, automobile theft was a common problem, especially in thriving cities such as New York. Today, cases of auto theft may not be as prominent as in years past, but the consequences are harsher than ever before. Although trends in crime are veering away from car theft in some places, there are a number of vehicles that nevertheless have higher chances of being stolen. What other factors play into the crime of larceny in big cities? An article in The New York Times weighs in on the gradual decrease in car theft in New York City, pointing out the drastic drop in theft over the years: the city had 147,000 auto theft reports in 1990, and only 7,400 in 2012. The most evident reason for this decline is the advancement of technology in vehicles–for example, engine immobilizer systems adopted in the late 1990s and early 2000s allows cars to start only with an ignition key. This key is microchipped by the dealer to align only with the car. This advancement alone could account for why so many criminals choose older cars to steal; newer technology simply takes more time to understand and manipulate. Yet the Times also considers the decreasing worth of older cars; why would thieves go after them in the first place? A loophole in New York law allows cars to be sold for parts without a title if it is over eight years old, but even that approach has become harder to carry out over recent years. New York’s trend in auto theft may appear on the decline, but what cars are the most highly prized for thieves? According to Pix 11 News, the Honda Accord and Civic remain at the top of the list for most-stolen cars, and although the crime is not as concerning as in the past, it is still a common issue. As aforementioned, newer models have a smaller chance of being stolen. The National Insurance Crime Bureau, however, is not fooled, as Pix shares the Bureau’s data that car theft has seen an increase over the last two years. Some of the most-stolen newer vehicles include the 2016 Toyota Camry and the 2015 Nissan Altima. The unpredictability of larceny in New York can place many drivers on edge, but the common consensus seems to be that older models remain the hot commodity.

Nearly everyone in Mineola has likely heard a story of someone finding something of value that has been lost in a place like a restaurant or a park. Such occurrences may be much more common than most believe. Research data shared by The New York Daily News shows that one in five Americans loses a personal item every week, with the average person losing up to $5,591 in belongings during his or her lifetime. The question is what obligations do those who find lost or mislaid items have in terms of returning them in order to avoid being accused of theft? To answer that question, one needs to first understand how the state defines lost property. According to Section 251.3 of New York’s Personal Property Laws, lost property includes: Mislaid (forgotten) property Abandoned property Waifs (property recovered after a theft) Treasure troves (valuable items found hidden) The state’s property laws go on to say that if one finds (or comes into possession of) lost property that is believed to be valued at $20 or more, he or she is required to either return it to its supposed owner or the proper authorities within 10 days. For property found within a city, the proper authority would be that city’s police department. It would be the state police or the sheriff’s office for the county in which it was found if lost property is discovered outside of city limits. Lost property found in a state park or on a state university campus should be handed over to park officials or campus authorities, respectively. A failure to turn over lost property according to the law could result in a misdemeanor charge. However, handing over lost items to the owner of the property on which they were found absolves one of culpability.