Blog

A Federal Judge in the Eastern District of New York agreed with Attorney Todd Greenberg at sentencing that our client was going to suffer severe collateral consequences from his criminal conviction which should be taken into account by the Sentencing Court. Our client, an alleged but denied “Associate” of the Gambino crime family, was convicted of Federal Wire Fraud regarding a scheme to defraud the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by failing to pay payroll taxes owed to the Federal Government. His guideline range was 21 to 27 months imprisonment. Through an extensive Pre-Trial submission, Mr. Greenberg was able to point out our client’s lesser role in the offense and the extreme collateral consequences of his conviction, including Immigration consequences, financial consequences and the fact that the client has been under Bail restrictions thru the pendency of the case. The Federal Judge, in a fair weighing of those factors, sentenced our client to time served (sixteen days prior to making Bail) and restitution. Through the diligent efforts of Mr. Greenberg, our client received a sentence well below the Guideline range even though the Government opposed same. If you are under Federal investigation or involved in a case you would like to discuss, please contact our firm and ask for Todd Greenberg at 718-268-0400 or at Queenslaw.com

The Defendant was charged with Conspiracy to Defraud Financial Institutions, a Class “B” Federal Felony, along with several other co-conspirators. Several banks were the victims of this multimillion dollar Mortgage Fraud. The Federal guidelines called for a range of imprisonment of approximately five years. Due to a Motion by Federal Criminal defense Attorney Todd Greenberg, United States District Judge Peter G. Sheridan departed from the Federal sentencing guidelines on the ground that the Defendant’s father, a co-defendant and leader of the conspiracy, strongly influenced his son. Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg argued to the Federal Judge that the father-son relationship exhibited herein, between this Defendant and his father, the undisputed leader of this Conspiracy, represented a classic example of Confucianism, a philosophy strongly embedded in Korean Culture and in this particular Defendant. According to the presentence Memorandum prepared by Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg, citing to Confucius, each person had a specific place in society and certain duties to fill. Confucius set up five principles relationships in which people are involved, one of them being “father and son”. In passing sentence, the Court noted this relationship, the trust between this Defendant and his father, and departed considerably from the Federal Guidelines, finding the father’s influence contributed to the Defendant’s actions. Extensive preparation by Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg helped a client of Addabbo and Greenberg avoid a lengthy Federal prison sentence.

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.)

Our client pled guilty to Alien Smuggling and was granted a variance from the Federal Guideline Range that called for a jail sentence. Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Todd D. Greenberg argued that his client’s actions were not for financial but that he acted out of amorous feelings for a coconspirator. Further, his role, in relation to the other conspirators, was minimal. Mr. Greenberg submitted an extensive Pre-Sentence Memorandum setting forth the character of his client, his family contributions, his involvement in religious organizations and his work history to convince the Federal District Court Judge that there was extreme mitigation in his actions and that although his client committed a criminal act, he was far from a criminal. The Federal District Court Judge, acknowledging Mr. Greenberg’s hard work, stated that counsel did a “…very thorough job…” in his client’s sentencing submission and sentenced Mr. Greenberg’s client to two-years’ probation with a special condition of six months house arrest. Instead of a jail sentence which would have taken Mr. Greenberg’s client away from his family and two young children, Mr. Greenberg’s client can remain at home, work and lead a law abiding and productive life. No matter where your problem is, Mr. Greenberg can help. Please call us at 718-268-0400 or visit us at www.Queenslaw.com.

By Reuven Fenton New York Post A brother-and-sister team that pleaded guilty to peddling millions in counterfeit brand-name clothing and other merchandise got a virtual slap on the wrist yesterday, when a Brooklyn federal judge ruled that they were “sucked” into a life of crime. “I am convinced that these are good people who were engaged in bad conduct,” Judge Brian Cogan said after hearing Jian and Lin Hu’s teary statements. The two pleaded guilty to charges that they worked for ZX Trading, a counterfeit-smuggling ring that sold cheap goods — including knockoff Trojan condoms that had failed leakage tests — between 2002 and ’08 and transferred more than $12 million in profits to China. But Cogan found that the Hus were not among the defendants who sold the faulty condoms. Those ex-ZX employees are to be sentenced next month. The siblings said they were lured into the business by their brother and felt pressured to support struggling relatives overseas. Attorney Todd Greenberg represented Lin Hu.

Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg, through persistence and diligent effort, obtained a Deferred Prosecution agreement for his client who was charged with defrauding the United States Department of Housing by obtaining Section 8 Housing Subsidies in connection with the lease of an apartment in New York City. It was alleged that our client obtained “Section 8” vouchers and failed to disclose to the Government that her fiancé was actually living in the apartment with her and never disclosed his income which would have rendered the client ineligible for such Aid. Although the evidence at first seemed strong, after investigating the facts of this case, it became clear to Mr. Greenberg that the only reason that the Client’s fiancé was living in the apartment was that the Client’s children were being threatened by a harassing neighbor and that the fiancé moved into the apartment to protect the client and her children. Further, it was discovered that it was that harassing neighbor who reported to the New York State Department of Investigation that our client was in violation of her lease and Section 8 rules! Although the Government was reluctant at first to allow a dismissal of the criminal charges, after several meetings and persistence by Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg, the Government allowed a Deferred Prosecution for a six (6) month period after which all charges will be dismissed and sealed as if it never occurred. The client, a New York City employee, will be able to retain her employment and resume her life. A Deferred Prosecution (also known as Pretrial Diversion) is an alternative to prosecution which seeks to divert certain offenders from tradition criminal justice processing into a program of supervision and services administered by the U.S. Probation service, resulting in a dismissal of all charges. Our Client will receive a dismissal of all Federal criminal charges instead of having a criminal record. If you have a need for an experienced Criminal Defense Lawyer, call Todd Greenberg for the best result. You can reach Mr. Greenberg at 718-268-0400 or visit us at www.addabboandgreenberg.com.

A Southern District of New York Federal Judge granted what the Judge called a “significant variance” from the Federal Sentencing Guidelines with regard to a fifty (50) year old defendant who pled guilty to Possession of Child Pornography via the Internet. The Defendant was originally charged with Distribution and Possession of Child Pornography via the Internet. Immediately upon being retained, Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg secured the Defendant’s release on a $100,000.00 signature bond. Thereafter, after discovering significant mitigating factors, Mr. Greenberg retained an expert to perform a Psychosexual evaluation. There were legal hurdles that Mr. Greenberg had to overcome to secure a fair sentence for his client who readily admitted his guilt: The charge of Distribution of Child Pornography via Internet carried a mandatory minimum of five (5) years’ incarceration. A presentation was made to a committee of Assistant US Attorneys in the Southern District and, based on the mitigating circumstances presented, Mr. Greenberg was able to procure a plea to Possession of Child Pornography, a charge that did not carry a mandatory minimum sentence. Citing the character of the Defendant, his continued counselling, his low risk of recidivism and the inherent unfairness of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Child Pornography possession, the Federal Judge granted a “significant variance” from the Guideline Range. Instead of a Federal Guideline sentence between 6 ½ years to 8 years, the Defendant received a 2 year sentence with three years’ supervised release. Through the effort of Federal Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg, his client’s sentence was significantly reduced. Please contact Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg at 718-268-0400 if you are charged with a computer crime.

On May 5 th, 2015, Federal Criminal Defense attorney Todd Greenberg obtained a sentence of one year and one day for a client who was charged in a heroin drug conspiracy in the Southern District of New York that mandated a ten-year minimum sentence. Mr. Greenberg was able to advocate for his client that his involvement in the Conspiracy was limited in time, that his client’s involvement arose out of his friendship with a Codefendant who he accommodated by driving him around and that the Defendant received no monetary profit from his acts and the Defendant was a minor participant in the Conspiracy. Further, Mr. Greenberg negotiated a plea wherein his client admitted to the lowest Drug quantity among his Codefendants and the Federal Guideline range was 21 – 27 months imprisonment. Upon submission of an extremely detailed Presentence Memorandum, as well as a presentation at sentence, the Federal Judge granted a variance from the Sentencing Guidelines and, at the request of Mr. Greenberg, sentenced the Defendant to a year and one day. Why the one day? Under the Federal system, if a Defendant is sentenced to one year in jail he must complete the full twelve months in jail. However, if the sentence exceeds one year, even by one day, the Defendant is entitled to a 15% reduction of his sentence. Therefore, the year and one-day sentence equaled 316 days in jail. At the time of sentence, the Defendant had already served nine months. Instead of serving ten (10) years for a serious Drug Conspiracy Felony Indictment Mr. Greenberg’s client served ten (10) month in jail! If you unfortunately find yourself in need of an experienced Federal Criminal Defense Attorney, call Todd Greenberg, 718-268-0400 or visit us at NewYorkArrested.com.

Read it here.

On May 18 th, 2012, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida dismissed a 15 Count Indictment against Attorney Todd Greenberg’ s client which charged her with Importation and Distribution of Counterfeit Goods including baseball hats, toothpaste, clothing and various other items. Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg maintained that his client had no knowledge, and did not participate in, the conspiracy. Extensive motion practice led the US Attorney to agree to a plea to a Misdemeanor charge resulting in dismissal of the entire Indictment. On May 18 th, 2012, Mr. Greenberg’s client was sentenced to twelve (12) months of probation instead of facing up to twenty (20) years imprisonment. A co-defendant was sentenced to a prison term, which Mr. Greenberg was able to avoid for his client. Additionally, Mr. Greenberg’s client, would have faced deportation charges if convicted of a felony. Once again knowledge of the law and diligent representation has led to the dismissal of all felony charges against Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg’s client and avoided the client’s deportation.

By Robert E. Kessler – STAFF WRITER NEWSDAY The very bad news recently for , a Long Island City millionaire, was that a federal judge ruled that he had murdered his wife in Hicksville in 1999. The good news at the same time for was that the judge also decided that the jury hearing the case involving mail fraud would not be told about the homicide ruling. The decisions, which might seem contradictory, were the latest twists in the unusual case of , 63, of 43-20 40 th St., who is not charged with the murder of his wife in a state court, but who is charged in a federal case with defrauding her. case ended up in a federal court because prosecutors say they have enough evidence to charge him under federal law with defrauding his late wife, Ourida, of half of their $1.4 million in joint assets, and also of money laundering, while Nassau detectives are still continuing to investigate her murder. Ourida Bessaha, 54, was found murdered with 20 hammer blows to her skull in January, 1999, in her Hicksville home on Brittle Lane. Federal prosecutor Gary Brown had argued in pre-trial hearings before Federal District Court Judge Leonard Wexler in Hauppauge that the government should be allowed to introduce evidence at fraud trial to show that he had murdered his wife to prevent her from keeping her share of the money. The evidence would include statements she made as part of a messy divorce proceeding the couple was going through. attorney, Todd Greenberg, of Forest Hills, denies his client is guilty of either fraud or the murder. Usually, in fairness during trials, the statements of a dead person cannot be used against a defendant because the witness is not available to be cross-examined by defense attorneys. The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution normally guarantees the right of a defendant to confront an accuser, and court procedures bar the admission of statement made outside of court, so-called hearsay statements. But there is an exception to these constraints on evidence from dead people because of a 1982 federal case, involving a Huntington man named Richard Mastrangelo, who was sentenced to 9 years in prison for smuggling drugs from Columbia. The principal evidence against Mastrangelo was the grand jury testimony of a man who was subsequently murdered before he could testify at trial. The Supreme Court eventually ruled that Mastrangelo was involved in the witness’ murder and criminals should not be allowed to benefit from the killings of such witnesses. To determine if the testimony of the deceased can be allowed at trial, the court established a pre-trial hearing, known as a Mastrangelo hearing. These are exceedingly rare, and prosecutors and defense attorneys could recall only a handful of them in the metropolitan area. Under the procedure, federal prosecutors do not have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as in homicide cases, to allow the admission of the alleged victim’s testimony, but only on the preponderance of the evidence. After Mastrangelo hearing, Wexler ruled two weeks ago that had ‘procured the unavailability of his wife to testify,’ and, thus, her statement about his fraudulent financial activities will be allowed at trial. Wexler agreed that prosecutors had complied a mountain of evidence pointing to involvement in his wife’s death: He had made threats against her; he had asked his children if the locks on her home had been changed; the murder took place a day before a divorce proceeding in which stood to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars; there was no evidence of forced entry, theft or rape at the crime scene; and ‘there was evidence of a footprint at the crime scene that was consistent with the defendant’s shoe.’ Also making ‘a strong impact on the court,’ Wexler said, was the fact that though was with police for many hours after his wife died, ‘he never asked if his wife’s death was the result of a crime, natural causes or of an accident.’ But while allowing the jury to hear the wife’s testimony in the divorce proceedings, Wexler ruled that the jury will not be told of possible role in his wife’s death because it would be too prejudicial in a fraud trial. Greenberg, attorney, said he disagreed with the judge’s ruling but could appeal it only if his client is convicted. Federal prosecutors declined to comment. Nassau detectives are still conducting an investigation into the murder, sources say. This is because while there is a preponderance of evidence to link to his wife’s murder, there is still the possibility that a jury might not find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt with the evidence gathered so far. But such a local investigation may be beside the point if is convicted of the federal fraud charges. Normally, federal fraud and money laundering charges carry only an 8-year prison sentence. But if convicted, could face as stiff a sentence as if he had been convicted of murder. Under federal sentencing guidelines, a trial judge can impose a life sentence if he believes that fraud and money laundering were related to murder.