Acquittal to Finish Off 2013
Pardon the scarcity of blog posts into the fall and early winter of 2013. The end of the year has been an extremely active, busy and satisfying time here at the Office. One of my new years resolutions is to post more information to the blog, and I really hope to live up to it in the coming year.
I did however want to share one success story before we turn the page to 2014.
I was able to secure a not guilty verdict after trial for a client charged with Criminal Contempt in the First Degree, which is a felony level offense that carried with it the possibility of state prison time. The trial occurred in the unique setting of the Integrated Domestic Violence (IDV) part of Supreme Court, something that few clients have ever even heard of before they find themselves there.
The idea behind IDV is to consolidate criminal cases and family court actions into one court where the parties in each of the cases are the same. So, for instance, in the recent case that I tried, my client was charged criminally with violating an order of protection (hence the criminal contempt charge, in that the client was accused of violating a court order) by having contact with the same person who the client was opposing in a family court custody and visitation action regarding a child that the parties had in common. The theory is to make the proceedings more efficient by having them occur in one court simultaneously. (Whether the theory actually matches up with how things go in real life I will leave for another day.)
In IDV you will find criminal cases from simple misdemeanors all the way up to violent felonies combined with family court cases like custody, visitation and family offense proceedings. The program is about a decade old, and has had many judges presiding over it through the years, including Judges Alex Renzi, Daniel Doyle, Elma Bellini and Gail Donofrio of Supreme Court. At present Judge John Gallagher of Family Court is assigned there. The DA’s Office and Public Defender also staff IDV with attorneys specifically assigned there. Oftentimes and depending on the circumstances there are also attorneys assigned by the Court to represent the children involved in the cases. These attorneys (I am one of them) are specially trained as part of the Attorneys for the Child Program.
It takes a unique skill set to practice in IDV. Obviously an attorney needs to know how to handle both criminal and family cases, but it goes a little deeper than that, in my opinion. Whether for good or ill, there is a give and take and an interplay between how the criminal and family aspects of the cases proceed. While in theory the criminal and family cases are supposed to proceed on parallel tracks, how cases are evaluated and screened, how negotiations proceed and how resolutions are crafted often bring the two cases together in attempts to reach “global” solutions. Many times outside agencies like Child Protective Services and Probation are involved in the cases too. As always, experience is the best teacher for attorneys in representing clients in a unique court like IDV. Speaking for myself, I have been handling cases there going back to at least 2007.
Specifically as to this most recent trial, my client, thank goodness, was smart enough to take advantage of the recording capabilities of a cell phone, at the encounter was captured entirely on audio and partially on video so everyone could hear and (somewhat) see what happened. It was clear, at least to me, that at no time did my client violate the terms of the order of protection as was alleged in the indictment, and the verdict reflected that. There was some discussion prior to the trial about the admissibility of the recording, but relying on the great work of my investigator and my computer forensics expert we were able to take care of that potential issue.
I look forward to being able to report more positive results for clients just like this in 2014. If you find yourself in a situation where you think I might be of assistance, I invite you to contact me right away.
Happy 2014, everyone.
(As always, past results do not guarantee future outcomes.)
PGA Championship Week
Well, it’s finally here – the 95th PGA Championship at spectacular Oak Hill Country Club. I worked my first shift as a marshal this morning, and while I didn’t see a lot of golfers getting out early I did get a chance to take in the scenery before the tournament begins in earnest on Thursday. I even got my picture in the paper. Thanks to Tina Yee ( @TYee23) of the D&C.
New Office Phone Number
Please call us at our new office phone number – 585.270.4262
For those of you who have the old phone number, that still works so feel free to use that if you like.
Acquittal
I am pleased to report that I was able to obtain a not guilty verdict after a jury trial last Friday. The name of the case was People v. Jechan Burnett, and the circumstances were unusual in that this was a re-trial of a case that was overturned on appeal by the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, in November of last year.
In 2008, Mr. Burnett was convicted of Assault in the First Degree and sentenced to 15 years in state prison. He authored his appeal pro se – that is to say on his own and without assistance of counsel. His conviction was reversed because the Court at the first trial declined to instruct the jury as to two lesser included offenses of Assault in the Second Degree. By the time the case was returned to Supreme Court for re-trial, Mr. Burnett had served a little more than five years of his sentence.
Mr. Burnett always maintained that he had acted in self-defense on the day of the incident, which is known in New York as the defense of justification. He further maintained that the injuries suffered by the complaining witness, while significant, were not as serious as had been presented to the jury at the first trial.
After a week long trial, Mr. Burnett was found not guilty of Assault in the First Degree, as well as the two lesser included offenses of Assault in the Second Degree. I believe that Mr. Burnett’s decision to testify on his own behalf, after we had prepared at length, was critical to the outcome.
So a man who was facing the next decade of his life behind bars now has an opportunity for a much brighter future. I credit him with having the confidence to proceed with a second trial, and I credit both of us with communicating effectively as attorney and client as well as being thoroughly prepared. I will leave the last word for Mr. Burnett himself:
“Matt was a good listener. He allowed me to participate actively in preparing my defense. Matt was both a great lawyer to have represent me and a great person to work with.”
If you find yourself in need of representation, please contact me right away.
(Past results do not guarantee similar future outcomes.)
Office Closed 7/1-7/5
Hello all. Please note that the office is closed for vacation this upcoming week of Monday, July 1st through Friday, July 5th. The office will reopen on Monday, July 8th.
Should anything of an emergency nature arise, please contact my associate, Heidi Feinberg, Esq. at 585-270-4262.