Blog

On January 11, 2011, a Brooklyn Jury acquitted the Defendant, a thirty- seven year old man, of the Class C Felony of Criminal Possession of a Gun that was in a car in which he was sitting. The offer prior to trial was seven years incarceration for having a loaded weapon in the car. Without calling any witnesses on his own behalf, and through extensive cross-examination of the police witnesses by Defense Attorney Todd D. Greenberg, it was established that the defendant had a dispute with his girlfriend on the street, which the police saw, and observed the defendant get into the car wherein the police approached the car, asked him to exit and arrested him for Disorderly Conduct. Upon the arrest, the arresting officer stated that he observed the “butt of the gun” sticking out from under the seat and arrested the defendant for the weapons charge. Even though there is a presumption of possession of a gun when in a vehicle under New York Law, Attorney Greenberg successfully argued to the Jury that the Defendant’s presence in the car was only for a “fleeting moment” and there was no evidence that the defendant brought the car to the location or otherwise exercised dominion and control over the car. Instead of taking the offered plea, Mr. Greenberg advised the client to take the case to trial wherein the Jury found, based on Mr. Greenberg’s arguments, that the presumption of possession should not apply in this case and found defendant “not guilty”. Once again, knowledge of the Law and knowledge of the facts has helped a client of Addabbo and Greenberg avoid a serious criminal conviction and jail time.

In a Trial that concluded on October 13 th, 2010, Attorney Todd D. Greenberg obtained an acquittal of a serious assault charge for his client which would have resulted in a mandatory minimum state prison time of three and one half years to a maximum of fifteen years if found guilty. The Defendant and complainant were at a bar and had an argument over a card game. They tussled in the bar and, approximately one hour later, the Defendant was accused of hitting the complainant over the head with a bat in front of the complainant’s house. The Defendant was acquitted of the most serious charge and found guilty of a lesser assault which did not require a mandatory minimum jail term. At sentencing, citing the well prepared pre-sentence memorandum submitted by the defense, instead of the Defendant receiving three and one half years in prison, the Defendant was sentenced to 364 days in prison of which he will serve approximately 7 months. Significantly, Attorney Greenberg was able to persuade the Judge to sentence the Defendant to 364 days instead of one year which would affect the Defendant’s immigration status in the United States. Since the sentence is less than one year, the Defendant is not automatically deportable due to the conviction. Once again, knowledge of the Criminal Law and knowledge of the Immigration Laws helped Addabbo and Greenberg’s client avoid a lengthy prison sentence and deportation.

In a major legal victory in Federal court in Buffalo, Attorney Todd D. Greenberg, Esq., along with Buffalo Attorney Mark J. Mahoney, Esq., who represented a Co-defendant, obtained suppression of evidence found in a search of Mr. Greenberg’s client’s home, including pictures of Nike sneakers, financial records and approximately $450,000 in cash. Addabbo and Greenberg’s client was charged, along with 22 other alleged co-conspirators, with Trafficking in Counterfeit Goods and Conspiracy. The Indictment alleged that the Conspiracy involved a violation of Nike, Inc. trademarks. It was alleged that Addabbo & Greenberg‘s client, with others, “…devised and engaged in a criminal scheme to traffic in millions of dollars of footwear bearing counterfeit Nike marks.” An arrest warrant was issued from the Federal Court in Buffalo and our client was arrested in his home in Flushing. During the search, Federal agents recovered photos of Nike sneakers, financial records and $450,000 in cash. The Government argued that the seizure was lawful under the “plain view” doctrine, which states, in substance, that if the police are lawfully in a position from which they view an object, if its incriminating character is immediately apparent, and if the officers have a lawful right of access to the object, they may seize it without a warrant. After extensive pretrial hearings in Buffalo, the court found, as argued by Attorney Todd. D. Greenberg, Esq., that the agents had no reason to be in those portions of the apartment from which the items were seized because they arrested the defendant at his doorway. Further, with regard to the “plain view” argument by the Government, the Court noted that this alleged “plain view” seizure, where the incriminating nature of the items must be “immediately apparent”, took two hours, as established during Mr. Greenberg’s cross examination of the Federal Agent. Under such circumstances, the Government could not sustain its burden of establishing that the incriminating nature of the items were “immediately apparent”. It should be noted that 18 of the other defendants pleaded guilty and now, after the granting of this suppression motion, Mr. Greenberg’s client stands a good chance of a dismissal of the case. (Note: This decision was rendered by a Magistrate-Judge and must be confirmed by The District Court Judge.; Mr. Greenberg was joined on The Brief by Jonathan Edelstein, Esq.)

The Defendant, a college student who recently received an Honorable Discharge from the Army, was at a gathering on April 15, 2010 in the home of a female friend with approximately ten other young persons in New York City. After several drinks, one of the women began to act in a very seductive manner towards the Defendant. After proceeding to a bedroom, the Defendant and woman began kissing and hugging when the woman did not want to go any further and the Defendant stopped his advances. Nevertheless, the woman reported an Attempted Rape and Sexual Abuse in the First Degree, extremely serious offenses. After his arrest, the Defendant retained Addabbo & Greenberg where an immediate investigation ensued. Every person at the party was spoken to, videos from cell phones were obtained and it was determined that the woman, falsely reported a crime to conceal her actions from her boyfriend who arrived at the party at approximately 2:30 a.m. The hard work of Attorneys Todd D. Greenberg resulted in obtaining actual videos from cell phones of the woman’s seductive and obviously drunk behavior. Upon presentation of these facts to the District Attorney’s office of New York County, the District Attorney did a full investigation, and, using the information provided by Addabbo & Greenberg, dismissed this serious Felony case. Further, a request was made of the District Attorney’s office to commence a prosecution against the woman for falsely reporting an incident. The hard work and early investigation of these serious charges by the attorneys of Addabbo & Greenberg resulted in a Dismissal of all charges.

Boy, 15, charged in Roosevelt murder  Cody Hernandez BY MATTHEW CHAYES A 15-year-old boy from Roosevelt — a reputed member of the Crips street gang — was arraigned Thursday on a murder charge in the death of a rival from the Bloods, according to court records and Nassau County police. Cody Hernandez is accused of shooting Lord Carter with a .25-caliber handgun, striking him in the stomach and left thigh, according to a felony complaint. At the arraignment hearing Thursday, a judge ordered Hernandez jailed without bail. He is charged as an adult with second-degree murder. The police said a witness saw the two arguing June 21 at East Fulton Avenue and Scherer Place in Roosevelt just before Hernandez fired around 11:15 p.m., then ran away. And the day before, the two had a dispute in Centennial Park in Roosevelt, said homicide Det. Sgt. Richard Laursen of the Nassau police. “There was some personal animosity between the two,” Laursen said. “Without a gun, it would have just been a dispute.” The murder weapon has not been recovered, Laursen said. Just before his latest arrest, Hernandez had been in a juvenile jail for violation of probation stemming from a criminal case in family court, according to records. Citing the confidentiality of juvenile court records, a Nassau police spokesman refused to detail Hernandez’s previous crime. Hernandez pleaded not guilty at his arraignment at First District Court in Hempstead, said his attorney, Dominic L. Addabbo of Forest Hills. Addabbo said he would not comment on the merits of the case. Hernandez is due back in court next week. Addabbo said he and his client are deciding whether Hernandez should testify before a grand jury. No one answered the door at the home where records say Hernandez lives. A neighbor who refused to give his name called the teen’s arrest “shocking” and “a tragedy for the family.” Asked about the arrest, Carter’s girlfriend, Aleyah Cust, 19, said, “It’s a big weight off my shoulders. I’d rather him be arrested than in the streets.” Staff writers Laura Rivera and Michelle Trauring contributed to this story.

On May 22nd 2009, the Defendant, who pled guilty to distributing 50 grams or more of cocaine base (crack cocaine), received what a Federal Judge called a “lenient” sentence based upon arguments made by Attorney Todd D. Greenberg at Sentencing. The Defendant, pursuant to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, faced a sentence range of 70 to 87 months. In a Pre-Sentence Memorandum, Mr. Greenberg pointed out to the Court that on April 29th, 2009, at a United States Senate Hearing entitled “RESTORING FAIRNESS TO FEDERAL SENTENCING: ADDRESSING THE CRACK-POWDER SENTENCING DISPARITY”, an Assistant Attorney General stated that the sentencing disparity (a person selling crack cocaine would receive the same mandatory minimum sentence as someone selling a hundred times as much powder cocaine) was “difficult to justify based on the facts and science, including evidence that crack is not an inherently more addictive substance than powder cocaine.” Further, it was pointed out to the Judge that a review of the legislative history behind the adoption of the 100 to 1 ratio was that Congress sought to focus the five and ten year mandatory minimum penalties on “serious” and “major” traffickers, those responsible for delivering very large quantity of drugs. During sentencing, Mr. Greenberg argued that this Defendant was not a major trafficker and that fairness in drug sentencing, based upon the Justice Department April 29th, 2009 statement, would require a substantially less prison term than the Guideline range. The Federal Judge agreed and sentenced the Defendant to one year and one day instead of a minimum sentence of 5 years and 10 months. By being up to date on current events occurring in the United States Senate regarding Hearings on Crime and Drugs, the Attorneys at Addabbo & Greenberg were able to bring the most current legal argument before the sentencing Judge which resulted in a substantially less jail sentence.

On February 25, 2009, after three days of deliberation, the Jury in a three week Murder trial being held in Nassau County stated they were “hopelessly deadlocked” in a case that arose from an alleged gang shooting. The Defendant, 15 years old at the time, was accused with shooting, at point blank range, a member of a rival gang in front of witnesses. Attorney Todd D. Greenberg challenged the credibility and the reliability of the witnesses, some of whom were at a Barbecue and admittedly had many drinks. A date for retrial has yet to be determined.

It was alleged that the Defendant, a Captain in the Emergency Services Unit of the NYC Department of Corrections, assaulted the complainant during a fellow corrections officer’s retirement party, causing him serious physical injuries. Attorney Dominic L. Addabbo was convinced that the Defendant acted in self-defense and had his private investigator obtain statements from several eye-witnesses to support this defense. The District Attorney refused to drop the charges as Mr. Addabbo demanded, and the District Attorney proceeded to present the case to the Grand Jury. Mr. Addabbo promptly arranged for the defense witnesses to appear before the Grand Jury. Based upon the sound advice and counsel the Defendant received from Mr. Addabbo, the Defendant himself also testified at the Grand Jury session. That strategy proved to be most effective, and as a result, the Grand Jury voted not to indict the Defendant. All charges against the Captain were dismissed and the records were sealed accordingly. The Captain was completely restored by the Department of Corrections to the position of trust he held before this incident.

The Defendant, charged with Murder, was in Court on October 17, 2008 wherein the District Attorney dismissed Two Counts of Murder (Intentional Murder and Depraved Indifference Murder) against him. The case, as reported in the New York Daily News, on Saturday, December 3, 2005, alleged that the Defendant shot and killed another, a Computer Programmer, because he tried to bum a cigarette from him. Extensive pre-trial Hearings were held wherein Attorney Todd D. Greenberg alleged that a videotape statement obtained by the Defendant was not “voluntarily” made and was obtained in violation of the Defendant’s Constitutional rights. Although the presiding Justice denied the Motion, Attorney Greenberg was of the opinion that the argument was extremely viable and could be argued in front of the Jury as well as on an Appeal if necessary. Immediately prior to trial, a Plea Bargain was reached wherein the Murder charges were dismissed and the Defendant pled guilty to Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree and was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment, of which he already served 3 years.

After a trial that spanned approximately two weeks a Queens Family Court Judge acquitted a 15-year old teen of Robbery and Assault charges. The Juvenile allegedly committed the robbery on February 8, 2008 when he, and at least nine other persons, approached the Complainant, assaulted him and took his cell phone. Attorney Todd Greenberg argued a classic mis-identification case. Cross-examination of the Complainant, as well as an alleged eye-witness Security Guard, established that the Security Guard actually never saw the robbery and the Complainant saw the Juvenile, not at the time of the robbery, but shortly thereafter and only saw the side of the Juvenile’s face. Further cross-examination revealed that the perpetrators of the crime were wearing “Hoodies” which would further hinder any identification. At the end of the case the Queens Family Court Judge complemented Mr. Greenberg for his presentation and defense of the Juvenile in this case. All charges were dismissed and the Juvenile released from custody. A co-defendant pled guilty prior to trial.

On May 7, 2008, the Defendant was found “Not Guilty” of all criminal charges stemming from an alleged attack by him against a neighbor with a machete. The Defendant was charged with Menacing and Criminal Possession of a Weapon regarding an incident that occurred on Saturday, September 9, 2006 immediately outside the Defendant’s home which is attached to the home of the Complaining Witness. The testimony revealed a long on-going dispute between the two families which culminated with words between the Defendant’s father and the Complainant wherein the Defendant was arrested and accused of coming out of his home with a machete and threatening his neighbor. The Police arrived and described a disorderly and violent crowd outside the Defendant’s house and the Police went inside and retrieved a machete which was introduced into evidence. Attorney Todd D. Greenberg attacked the credibility of the Witness and pointed out to the Court that on cross-examination two of the three witnesses testified that the Defendant never left the doorway of his home and did not exit his home, as the District Attorney alleged, to go after the Complainant. Further, after comparison of the testimony of the three alleged eye-witnesses, it was pointed out to the Court that there were major inconsistencies and that the Court should conclude that the testimony is false. On an interesting note, evidence was introduced that in the Indo Caribbean community, a machete, also known as “cutlass” is used for many things including cooking, gardening and as a household utensil. That argument was used to explain the presence of a machete in the Defendant’s house.

On February 6, 2008 all criminal charges of Assault were dismissed against the client of Addabbo & Greenberg and his records were sealed. The Defendant was originally charged on April 15, 2007 with an Assault allegedly arising from a dispute over a parking spot. It should be noted that the Defendant absolutely denied his involvement and an Alibi defense was prepared for trial. During Motion practice, after extensive investigation, it was discovered by Attorney Todd D. Greenberg that there was a photographic identification procedure utilized for which the District Attorney failed to give proper written Notice under the Criminal Procedure Law. A Motion to preclude any identification testimony at the trial was filed and, after oral argument, the Judge granted Attorney Greenberg’s Motion and precluded the District Attorney from offering any testimony from any witness who viewed a photograph of the Defendant of which the Defense was not informed. After the ruling, the District Attorney could not proceed and voluntarily dismissed all charges. Although Addabbo & Greenberg was ready to proceed to trial with a strong defense, a Motion based on Legal Principles caused the dismissal of all charges and a trial was not necessary.