CDH Law PLLC

Criminal Defense - Felony Charges

Our client was charged with the misdemeanor of criminal facilitation in the fourth degree. The allegation, in short, was that our client facilitated his co-defendant in the commission of an assault. Right as the misdemeanor speedy trial clock expired, the People took a CPL 170.20 adjournment (a delay to present the case to the grand jury instead of proceed in the lower court on the misdemeanor). Right before a subsequent appearance in the local court on the misdemeanor, the DA served on the defense a CPL 190.50 notice (a notice that they intended to present the case to the grand jury for felony prosecution). At the city court appearance that afternoon, we immediately moved to withdraw the motion to dismiss and stated our client’s desire to enter a plea to the misdemeanor as charged. It was imperative to lock in a plea before the case was indicted, ensuring double jeopardy barred further prosecution on more serious charges of what was essentially the same case. The Court accepted the misdemeanor plea over the People’s objection and sentenced our client to a conditional discharge. Undeterred, the People still indicted our client a few weeks later on charges of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, arising out of the very same criminal transaction for which he had just pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. This indictment carried with it the possibility of up to 40 years in prison. Ten days before the scheduled arraignment in county court, we filed a motion to dismiss the indictment on statutory double jeopardy grounds, arguing that both CPL 40.20 and 40.40 barred a second prosecution for what was essentially the same offense conduct, as the offenses in the indictment could have been joined to the original facilitation charge but the People failed to do so. At the county court arraignment on the indictment, having been alerted to the meritorious issue from the earliest stage, the court rejected the People’s argument that the severity of the indicted offense warranted a high bail, released our client on his own recognizance, and set a period of time for the People to respond to the motion to dismiss and for the defense to reply. At the next appearance, the Court dismissed the indictment and barred further prosecution of our client. The result was that, instead of facing a set of charges carrying with it the possibility of 40 years in prison, our client could put the case behind him and rest assured it was over.

Criminal Defense - Felony

Our client was indicted for the most serious of offenses and faced spending the rest of his life in prison. Instead, through CDH Law’s advocacy, we secured a plea to hindering prosecution in the first degree, a non-violent D Felony with a fraction of the prison time our client originally faced.

Criminal Defense - Domestic Violence

Our client was accused of physically assaulting his wife in front of his child. Our client was an undocumented Spanish-speaking immigrant. Utilizing our organic Spanish-speaking assets, we were able to negotiate the ultimate dismissal of the case. We showed the prosecution that the immigration consequences to the family, including the alleged victim and child, outweighed the benefit of further prosecution. The language barrier between the alleged victim and the government provided the defense a distinct advantage, as CDH Law was the only entity capable of communicating directly with all parties involved. We were able to communicate with everyone in the family (including the complaining witness), clear up confusion, and effectively convey the true nature of events to the prosecution. The potential immigration consequences of a case such as this one cannot be understated.

Criminal Defense - Domestic Violence

Our client was charged with criminal mischief in the fourth degree and harassment in the second degree. CDH attorneys were able to show that our client’s alleged actions were in response to years of domestic abuse at the hands of the alleged victim. The prosecution agreed to dismiss the charges given the comprehensive CDH investigation into the background of the allegations and the mitigating circumstances of the alleged offense behavior.

Criminal Defense - Sex Offender Registry

Our client was charged with a felony for failure to update his mailing address on the sex offender registry. We were able to show that he had not moved, and thus had a complete statutory defense to the charge. The prosecution agreed to dismiss the charges.

Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA)

Our client pleaded to a sex offense years ago. Upon his imminent release from prison his family contacted our office. The Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders recommended a Level 3 risk level. The prosecutor recommended a Level 2 risk level. We pointed out numerous errors in the risk assessment instrument, as well as the prosecution’s failure to carry its burden of proof on several risk factors, and the court found our client to be a Level 1 risk, the lowest risk level available in the state of New York. The result is that our client will not be listed publicly on the sex offender lookup website and will have less stringent reporting requirements.