General Grand Larceny

Published on: September 5, 2012

Interesting Legal Wrinkles in New York Credit Card Fraud Defense: Examining “Property” & “Owner” in a NY Grand Larceny & Stolen Property Case

When one is arrested in New York for Grand Larceny of Criminal Possession of Stolen Property, the property in question is often ascertainable in a quick and easy manner. After all, if you steal a car, a painting or money, the property “speaks for itself.” Equally clear, the owner of the property is usually obvious because a defendant is accused of stealing that property from a particular person or business. Often time the bigger issue that New York theft lawyers and larceny defense attorneys contend with is not whether the item stolen constitutes legal property or who the owner is, but whether or not the value of that property constitutes a misdemeanor, lower felony or a felony where prison is mandatory.

Before addressing the “legal wrinkles” in this blog entry’s title, let’s briefly define property. According to New York Penal Law 155.00(1), property is defined as money, personal or real property, evidence of debt or contract or any thing of value. Defined under New York Penal Law 155.00(5), an owner is a person who has a right of possession superior to the person who takes the property. It is important to note, however, a joint owner does not have superior rights to his or her fellow common owners.

Published on: August 23, 2012

Torah Crowns Stolen from Young Israel Synagogue of Queens Valley: Potential Crimes & Arrest Charges for Stolen Religious Property

By Jeremy Saland

According to the New York Daily News, a yarmulke sporting thief allegedly stole two “torah crowns” from Young Israel of Queens Valley. Posing as a congregant, it is alleged that the unapprehended varmit’s ill gotten gains netted him in excess of $1,000. Assuming the alleged perpetrator of this synagogue theft is ultimately caught, what potential crimes could he face?

One of the first thing that prosecutors do in any theft case is ascertain the value of the stolen property. Once the aggregate value of stolen property from one victim exceeds $1,000 (and is $3,000 or less as in this case), Assistant District Attorney know that they have a Fourth Degree Grand Larceny felony. More specifically, adding the value of the two torah crowns together, prosecutors will have on charge of New York Penal Law 155.30(1). While the theft of an individual torah crown may only be a misdemeanor Petit Larceny (New York Penal Law 155.25), the aggregation law allows law enforcement to pursue felony Grand Larceny prosecutions where there are multiple thefts over any period of time and from the same complainant.

Published on: August 18, 2012

Case Results: Arrest, Conviction & Prison Avoided in $90,000 New York City Bureau of Fraud Investigation into Grand Larceny & Welfare Fraud

By Jeremy Saland

An arrest or investigation in New York involving any type of fraud or theft is a concerning one. When investigators, detectives or Assistant District Attorneys want to “speak” with you or have some “questions,” your defenses should automatically be raised. Whether your first step is reaching out to a criminal lawyer or not, when the state or federal government is the potential victim of a larceny crime remember that identifying your defense as soon as possible may be the best way to protect yourself going forward from felony Welfare Fraud, Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of Stolen Property, Forgery and Offering a False Instrument for Filing arrests, indictments or convictions.

In a scenario that repeats itself routinely throughout New York City, individuals who are alleged to wrongfully receive certain benefits from New York City and New York State – unemployment benefits, Medicaid or food stamps – may not be contact by criminal law enforcement first, but by investigators from the Bureau of Fraud Investigation of the New York City Human Resources Administration (250 Church Street 3rd Floor). Make no mistake. What you say to these investigators can and will be used against you when fraud investigators share their findings with prosecutors for the purpose of commencing a criminal case.

Published on: August 12, 2012

Is an Expert or an Owner Required to Establish the Value of Stolen Property in a New York Grand Larceny Arrest

By Jeremy Saland

When accused or arrested for any Grand Larceny crime in New York, each and every dollar or cent can potentially be relevant in determining the appropriate degree of Grand Larceny you may face. In fact, having a New York Grand Larceny lawyer or criminal defense attorney analyze the value of the property allegedly stolen can potentially be a critical piece of any defense. While an arrest for Grand Larceny Embezzlement may not require the same review due to the nature of the stolen property (cash or money), when the stolen property consists of computers, vehicles and televisions have a more subjective value that diminishes (or increases) over time, determining the correct market value can mean the difference between facing no jail and up to four, seven, fifteen and even twenty five years of incarceration.

As I have addressed through this blog as well as our sister blog (NewYorkCriminalLawyerBlog.Com), the initial assessment in ascertaining value of property is to determine the market value of the property at the time of the theft or larceny. So, for example, if someone steals your iPad, laptop computer and iPhone, who better to testify or establish the market value than the owner? After all, an owner knows the condition of the property, what applications were installed and the age of the items in question. Can’t a victim of theft merely assert a particular value to satisfy the legal burdens of the New York Penal Law? The simple answer to this question is that there is no easy answer. However, this is where the value or importance of your criminal lawyer may truly rear its head. Whoever that person is who establishes value, what must be done to ensure that it is accurate and fairly represents the market value of the items in question and how can your attorney challenge that determination?

Published on: August 5, 2012

The Moral Certainty Standard in a New York Grand Larceny Case: A Criminal Law Assessment of Theft by False Promise with a Touch of Scheme to Defraud

By Jeremy Saland

In in a previous blog entry I addressed what constitutes a New York Scheme to Defraud under Penal Law 190.60 and 190.65. Experienced New York Grand Larceny defense attorneys, specifically those familiar with white-collar theft and fraud crimes, know that a Scheme to Defraud indictment often comes hand-in-hand with the charge of Grand Larceny. Many times, this Grand Larceny is premised in “false promises.” Logically, a Scheme to Defraud must be set into action by a lie; the scheme is predicated on a false promise or false representation. Thus, if you are involved in a Scheme to Defraud in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx or Westchester County, you likely may also be charged with “larceny by false promise” as defined under New York Penal Law 155.05(2)(d). Remember, that such a larceny is the manner in which the crime is perpetrated. The potential punishment or degree of the offense is still dictated by the value or amount of the actual theft.

In the context of Scheme to Defraud, a false promise is a representation that the schemer makes promising some future conduct will occur. This if often part of an overarching Scheme to Defraud (whereby the schemer ultimately steals property), without the intention to ever follow through with promised conduct. For instance, suppose I run a business that is going bankrupt. In a scheme to defraud, I tell a twenty investors that my company is gaining significant profits and they will surely receive a high amount of return in the next fiscal quarter. I fully intend to take their money and head for my villa in the south of France. In this hypothetical, I have committed a larceny by false promise and a Scheme to Defraud. The investors were never actually going to receive any profits from my failing business, and I never intended to give them any return on their investment as I promised.

Published on: July 26, 2012

DA Vance Doubles Down: Two Alleged Bank Fraudsters Arrested on Same Day

By Jeremy Saland

In a move reminiscent of “doubling down,” Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. is showing us all that he has earned his chops as New York’s top prosecutor (and 90th President of the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York). Unfortunately, for two accused felons, these chops are being achieved, in part, on their respective backs. According to the press releases of two unrelated arrests, Fordin Francois and Edward Lewando are alleged to have committed the crime of Grand Larceny in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 155.40) for stealing more than $700,000 and $300,000 respectively.

Prosecutors believe that Francois, a personal banker at JP Morgan Chase, defrauded at least seventeen bank accounts between January and June 2012. It appears that after obtaining personal identifying information of the bank’s clients, Francois shared this information with others who posed as account holders and made wire transfers. Additionally, it is believed that the fake checks were deposited into the accounts and ultimately drawn upon. Compounding matters, prosecutors claim that Francois had a briefcase with personal identifying information of JP Morgan Chase banking clients.

Published on: July 24, 2012

Problems & Issues Beyond Jail: Further Ramifications for NY Lawyers & Attorneys Convicted of Theft & Fraud

By Jeremy Saland

As a New York theft lawyer and a defense attorney, I routinely represent clients in Grand Larceny arrests, indictments and investigations in the New York City region. In this capacity I find myself counseling professionals to recognize the collateral consequences and ramifications of a New York theft and fraud arrest beyond of the four walls of the criminal court. In fact, only last week, I drafted an entry as to the suspension of a lawyer who had initially been arrested for Grand Larceny and later pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor theft crime of Petit Larceny. The following case I am about to address further “hits home” the gravity of a larceny conviction – misdemeanor or felony – upon the professional licensing of attorneys in New York. Whether you are stealing from an escrow account, shoplifting or perpetrating a theft in the form of a tax crime, understand there can, and often will, be consequences should your case not be handled properly.

In Matter of Maffia, D34357, NYLJ 1202547493906, at *1 (App. Div. 2nd, Decided March, 27, 2012), the Grievance Committee moved to confirm a Special Referee’s report of professional misconduct for an attorney was was convicted in Suffolk County of Petit Larceny pursuant to New York Penal Law 155.25. As I have noted many times, NY PL 155.25, whether by shoplift or theft of monies, is a wrongful taking of another’s property regardless of how insignificant the value may be. Petit Larceny is an “A” misdemeanor. In the case before the Grievance Committee, although respondent (defendant) did not admit to it, prosecution accused the defendant of stealing $5,743 and as part of the plea deal required him to make restitution.

Published on: July 16, 2012

Potential Secondary Punishment & Consequences for Shoplifting Arrests in New York: Censure & Disbarment for Lawyers & Attorneys

By Jeremy Saland

A New York shoplifting arrest, whether it be in violation of New York Penal Law 155.25, New York Penal Law 155.30, New York Penal Law 165.40 or New York Penal Law 165.45, is an extremely serious crime with enormous secondary and collateral consequences. Believing otherwise is both naive and foolish. An arrest for Petit Larceny, Grand Larceny or Criminal Possession of Stolen Property will not automatically land you in jail or result in a criminal record, but for professionals – lawyers, teachers, doctors, financial services employees and others – there are very real and significant issues in terms of careers and livelihood. Remember, while each case, arrest and allegation for a larceny or theft crime may share similarities with others, each offense and person accused is distinct and separate. The following case is worth reading to understand what can happen to you upon the close of your case and to identify issues that you should discuss with your New York shoplifting lawyer or theft attorney from the onset of your criminal allegation.

In Matter of Gallagher, M-472, NYLJ 1202558663857, at *1 (App. Div. 1st, Decided June 7, 2012), Mr. Gallagher, the respondent, appeared before the Departmental Disciplinary Committee in reference to his law license and privilege to practice law in the State of New York. Prior to the disciplinary hearing, the respondent (a defendant at that time) faced a felony complaint charging him with two violations of Fourth Degree Grand Larceny (New York Penal Law 155.30(1) for shoplifting property from Bergdorf Goodman in Manhattan. The property was valued at $2,500. NY PL 155.30, Fourth Degree Grand Larceny, is committed if and when property is stolen – whether from a bank account or a store – valued between over $1,000 and $3,000.

Published on: July 1, 2012

Saland Law PC Update: Top Criminal Defense Results, Super Lawyers and the Manhattan District Attorney Associates

By Jeremy Saland

Over the past few months, Saland Law PC has enjoyed success both in the courtroom and in the professional arena. The New York criminal defense attorneys and former Manhattan prosecutors at Saland Law PC have diligently and successfully advocated for clients investigated and arrested for Grand Larceny, Criminal Possession of Stolen Property and similar theft crimes in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Westchester County and the much greater New York City region. Although past results do not guarantee future outcomes, Saland Law PC’s criminal lawyers obtained significant departures from initial indictment or arrest charges for numerous clients while also keeping those clients from serving state prison or local jail sentences. Some of these recent examples include: People v. XXXX – Client arrested for entering a school and stealing multiple laptop computers worth thousands of dollars. Charged with “D” felony Grand Larceny related activities, client ultimately received a non criminal and non incarceratory Disorderly Conduct violation.

People v. XXXX – Client worked at a major financial institution and was indicted for felony Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree (an “E” felony) for stealing “secret scientific material” prior to retaining Saland Law PC. After search warrants were executed in an attempt to locate the “secret scientific material,” the prosecution sought incarceration on a felony plea. Saland Law PC’s criminal defense attorneys secured a misdemeanor without probation or prison. People v. XXXX – Client was alleged to have forged an employer’s name to a lease agreement while also using the employer’s credit card to make thousands of dollars in unauthorized purchases. Prosecutors believed that in addition to the credit card fraud, our client stole nearly $70,000 during the course of our client’s employment. Despite being identified in a lineup by employees of the store where the alleged credit card transactions occurred, the People ultimately agreed to permit the client to plea directly to a misdemeanor without probation or incarceration in lieu of an indictment on the felony Grand Larceny and related charges. Alternatively, the client was offered a deal whereby the client could plea to a felony, but later withdraw that plea to a potential non-criminal Disorderly Conduct violation if client followed certain rules. Although our client had faced Grand Larceny in the Third Degree (a “D” felony) and possibly greater felony Grand Larceny charges, our client avoided any felony conviction or incarceration. People v. XXXX – Client was alleged to have stolen credit cards from a restaurant the client frequented. Despite video showing what appeared to be our client taking the credit cards, the criminal defense attorneys at Saland Law PC successfully challenged the prosecution’s lack of a viable identification of our client. Ultimately, despite being charged with multiple “E” felony Grand Larcenies for theft of credit cards, our client received an ACD (adjournment in contemplation of dismissal) and our client’s record remained clean of any criminal convictions.

Published on: June 19, 2012

Grand Larceny from the Person of Another: Can a “Detective Investigation” be the Sole Basis of a NY Felony Complaint & Arrest Warrant

By Jeremy Saland

Often described as a lesser version of Robbery or a Robbery without force and violence, Grand Larceny from the Person of Another is a serious crime. An “E” felony, New York Penal Law 155.30(5) is punishable by as little as no jail, but up to as much as four years in state prison. In substance, a person is guilty of Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree pursuant to the “Person of Another” subsection (NY PL 155.30(5)) when that person takes property from another’s body, irrespective of its type or value.

There are many issues that New York criminal defense attorneys encounter defending their clients against felony allegations of Grand Larceny in this context. A recent Town Court decision, worth analyzing here, addresses one of these issues that a theft lawyer and his or her defendant may encounter.