Blog

Our client, a Senior at the University of Albany, was arrested, charge and Indicted for Rape by force and other related charges. There is no question that such allegations are serious and taken seriously by this office. However, such allegations are not always true. This was that case! From the beginning of this prosecution in 2019, Mr. Greenberg’s Client, upon Mr. Greenberg’s advice, turned down all plea offers and was determined to take this matter to a Jury. After reviewing all the evidence, including a “controlled phone call”, it was the defense position, as the Client said, that this was a consensual sexual encounter between the parties. Indeed, a close scrutiny of a one-hour long phone call found, in Mr. Greenberg’s opinion, that certain phrases used by the Complainant, when put in context, indicated consent. At the final pre-trial conference held one week before the Trial was to commence, with the Judge and the Albany District Attorney, Mr. Greenberg convinced the District Attorney that the Complainant’s credibility was highly questionable. The District Attorney decided not to proceed to Trial with the case and offered a Violation instead of a Crime. Mr. Greenberg advised that it would be prudent to end the case with a guilty plea to Harassment, a Violation and not a Crime, instead of risking a Jury Trial. On March 9th, 2020, the parties appeared in Albany County wherein the case resolved with a non-criminal disposition. Of note, the Albany County Judge stated, on the record, regarding Mr. Greenberg, that “…I think your attorney has done an excellent job advocating for you…” The New York Rape Statutes and When a Close-in-Age Defense May Matter New York law recognizes several different forms of rape, and the applicable statute depends on the allegations. For example, Penal Law § 130.25 includes third-degree rape based on sexual contact without consent, while Penal Law § 130.30 addresses second-degree rape involving, among other circumstances, an adult engaging in sexual contact with a person under 15. New York's close-in-age defense is limited. Penal Law § 130.30 provides an affirmative defense for the age-based portions of second-degree rape when the defendant was less than four years older than the victim at the time of the conduct. The defense therefore can be important in an age-based prosecution, but it does not automatically apply simply because two people are relatively close in age. In the Albany case discussed here, the published case summary describes an allegation of rape by force and the defense's position that the encounter was consensual. The case ultimately resolved with a plea to Harassment, a violation rather than a crime, after defense counsel challenged the complainant's credibility and presented the context of a recorded telephone conversation. The original case summary does not identify the parties' ages or specify the precise statutory subdivisions of the original indictment. For that reason, it would be inaccurate to say that a close-in-age defense actually applied in this case. If the prosecution had instead involved an age-based second-degree rape charge under Penal Law § 130.30, the parties' ages could have made the less-than-four-years affirmative defense legally relevant. On the facts publicly described in this post, however, the reported resolution turned on the consent and credibility issues—not a documented close-in-age defense. For a clearer explanation of New York sex-crime law, see our Sex Crimes FAQ & Statutes Guide, covering rape statutes, consent, age-based offenses, close-in-age defenses, and other issues that can affect a criminal sex-offense case. This article discusses the law generally and the facts reported in this particular case. The application of a statute or defense depends on the exact charges, dates, ages, and circumstances of an individual case. This information is not legal advice. If you have been charged with a sexual offense contact Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg at (718) 268-0400 or visit us at www.Queenslaw.com.

After our client was falsely accused of forcibly touching a woman on the subway we successfully secured a dismissal and sealing of his case. It was alleged that our client a respected businessman, rubbed and pressed his private area against a woman’s thigh and hip while riding the “E” train. Our client maintained his innocence. We rejected all plea offers from the District Attorney and demanded an immediate trial by jury. We appeared in court ready for trial and the District Attorney dismissed the case outright! Our willingness and ability to fight the case all the way prevented an injustice and resulted in all charges being dismissed and sealed. If you are charged with sex related crime, or any other crime, call attorneys Caitlin Quvus and Todd Greenberg for the best result at 718-268-0400 or visit us at www.addabboandgreenberg.com.

Our client was charged with Forcible Rape in the First Degree, a charge that carries a potential twenty-five (25) years in jail, based upon what our client maintained was a consensual encounter. The Indictment charged that our client engaged in sexual intercourse with a female by means of “forcible compulsion”. It was alleged that our client “…did grab the informant by the informant’s hair, throw the informant to the floor, causing the informant to fall to the informant’s knees, hold the informant down by placing his hand on the back of informant’s neck and…” had intercourse without informant’s consent. Our client, who was visiting from France, had his family reach out to New York Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg who immediately arranged for him to be released on bail. Our client maintained his innocence and all plea offers were rejected. An immediate investigation ensued wherein Mr. Greenberg and Associate Attorney Caitlin Young spoke to all of our client’s roommates. A very thin wall separated the room where this allegedly occurred and our client’s roommate who was a visiting student from Japan. That witness was leaving New York on his way back to Japan but had critical information: He “heard” the encounter and described sounds coming from the woman that sounded pleasurable and not compelled by force! Using a section of the law that is rarely utilized, Mr. Greenberg and Ms. Young moved the court for an Order to conditionally examine the witness to preserve his testimony at trial. Although the Trial was not going to occur until six (6) months later, the witness was called into Court, questioned and cross-examined and his testimony was videotaped for use at the trial. After his testimony, the offer became lower but, upon the advice of Mr. Greenberg, our client did not accept any plea in that he was not guilty in that the sexual encounter was consensual. On June 6th, 2017, the matter appeared for trial wherein the District Attorney stood up and outright dismissed the case! Once again, due diligence and knowledge of the Law on the part of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Todd Greenberg and Caitlin Young prevented an injustice and the entire Indictment was dismissed against our client. If you need help call Criminal Defense Lawyer Todd Greenberg at 718-268-0400 or you can reach our firm, Addabbo and Greenberg, at www.addabboandgreenberg.com. Understanding the New York Rape Statutes and the Close-in-Age Defense New York's rape statutes distinguish between allegations involving forcible compulsion, lack of consent, and offenses based primarily on the complainant's age. In the case described above, the indictment alleged first-degree rape based on forcible compulsion. New York Penal Law § 130.35 defines first-degree rape to include sexual contact committed by forcible compulsion, while Penal Law § 130.00 defines “forcible compulsion” in terms of physical force or certain threats that place a person in fear of immediate death, physical injury, or kidnapping. That distinction matters when discussing a so-called close-in-age exception. New York does provide a limited close-in-age affirmative defense under Penal Law § 130.30, but it applies to specified age-based second-degree rape charges involving a victim under 15, where the defendant was less than four years older than the victim. It is not a general defense to a rape allegation based on forcible compulsion. Accordingly, based on the facts described in this case, the close-in-age defense was not the issue that resolved the prosecution. The defense instead focused on the allegation of forcible compulsion and developed evidence from a roommate who heard the encounter. The prosecution ultimately dismissed the indictment after that evidence was preserved and presented. Want to understand how New York's sex-offense statutes work? Read our Sex Crimes FAQ & Statutes Guide for a straightforward explanation of consent, age-based offenses, close-in-age defenses, and related New York criminal laws. This article discusses the law generally and the facts reported in this particular case. The application of a statute or defense depends on the exact charges, dates, ages, and circumstances of an individual case. This information is not legal advice.

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.

August 1, 2014 No matter where the problem is, Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg is there to help. On July 16, 2014, in Virginia State Court, Fairfax County, all Sex Offense charges that carried a life sentence were dismissed and Todd Greenberg’s client was permitted to plead guilty to a Misdemeanor charge, was released from jail, and sentenced to unsupervised probation for one year. The case arose when the Defendant, a Queens County resident, was visiting his child in Virginia, when the child’s mother accused the Defendant of sexually touching the child. Although the Defendant denied the charges, to make matters worse, the Defendant made a full-taped confession to a Virginia Detective and to the baby’s mother over the phone. However, upon being retained and speaking to the Defendant, it became clear that the Defendant falsely confessed to a crime that never occurred due to the extreme pressure placed upon him by the baby’s mother that unless he “confessed” he would never see the child again. Immediately upon being retained, Mr. Greenberg traveled to Virginia, interviewed the Defendant in jail, hired a “False Confession” Expert and made a presentation to the Virginia District Attorney. At first, the District Attorney insisted on proceeding with the case and obtained an Indictment. However, after further persuasion by Mr. Greenberg, presentation of the report of the “False Confession” expert and research of Virginia Law regarding this issue, the District Attorney dismissed all Counts of the Indictment, allowed the Defendant to plead “guilty” to a Misdemeanor and receive one year of “unsupervised probation”. Once again, an immediate investigation, devotion to our client, and knowledge of the law, prevented a client of Addabbo and Greenberg from receiving a life sentence in prison. If you need help in New York or elsewhere, call attorney Todd Greenberg 718-268-0400.

After a four year legal battle conducted by New York Criminal Law Attorney Todd D. Greenberg, all criminal charges have been dismissed against a Winthrop University Hospital Medical Technician accused of fondling three patients. The case is an attestation to the diligence and persistence of New York Criminal Attorney Todd D. Greenberg, which included two Jury Trials and a reversal by the Appellate Division and, finally, a dismissal of the single remaining charge by the Nassau County District Attorney on the eve of a third Trial. On October 18, 2011, Supreme Court Justice William C. Donnino granted an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal to the remaining charge of Sexual Abuse which means that the case will be dismissed and sealed. Once again, knowledge of the law, preparation of the case and a firm believer in the innocence of our client has resulted in the complete exoneration of Todd Greenberg’s client and dismissal of an Indictment.

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.

On February 10, 2006, our client was acquitted by a jury of endangering the welfare of a child and sexual abuse in the second degree. Our client’s 16 year old niece alleged that the Defendant improperly touched her breast and vagina on two occasions while she was home alone with the Defendant. The evidence revealed that the allegations were made on the same date that the Complainant’s other received a letter from Complainant’s school that she was cutting class and being suspended. Defense attorney Todd Greenberg seriously questioned the Complainant’s credibility for not coming forward with the allegations prior to that time and the jury found that her credibility was a serious issue. Additionally, the Complainant claimed that the trauma kept her out of school for 13 days during March, April and May of 2004. Attorney Greenberg subpoenaed records from John Adams High School and introduced into evidence that 9 of those 13 days occurred on a Friday. After deliberating for about two hours, the jury acquitted our client.