Queens Drug Crime Defense Attorneys
Drug Crimes Defense
- Drug possession
- Drug cultivation
- Drug trafficking
- Drug distribution
- Other drug crimes
A detailed investigation is key in a drug crimes defense case. If you are facing criminal charges, our firm will thoroughly investigate every detail of your case, answering important questions like: What evidence was used to make an arrest? If charged with drug possession, was the defendant actually possessing an illegal drug, or just in proximity to one? Is illegal search and seizure an issue? We will consider these and other details of your case to begin building an effective defense.
On both the federal and state level, attorney Todd Greenberg has been involved in narcotics defense for more than 30 years. In the defense of a defendant in a major crack conspiracy case prosecuted in Federal District Court, Southern District of New York, Federal Court Judge Peter K. Leisure called Mr. Greenberg’s closing argument in USA v. Valdez, 90-cr-890-4, “… a high-caliber summation by an extremely capable lawyer.” Recently, Mr. Greenberg was able to obtain a significant sentence reduction in a federal drug case using the most current legal argument regarding the sentencing disparity between a person selling crack cocaine and a person selling powder cocaine. By being up to date on events in the United States Senate regarding hearings on crime and drugs, we were able to bring the most current legal argument to the sentencing judge, which resulted in a substantially reduced jail sentence.
A drug crime conviction can have significant and long-term effects on your life. If convicted, you may be facing large fines, prison time and a host of other penalties. If you believe you are under investigation for a drug crime — or if you have already been charged — you should hire an attorney who will take your charges seriously and help you avoid or lessen the negative consequences you may be facing.
At the law office of Addabbo & Greenberg, we understand the gravity of drug crime charges involving marijuana, methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, ecstasy, other illegal drugs and prescription drugs. Our firm will apply our knowledge and experience in seeking optimal results on your behalf. Contact a Queens drug crime defense lawyer today.
Contact a New York Conspiracy Lawyer
To schedule an initial consultation with an experienced drug crimes defense attorney, call 718-268-0400, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Here are some examples of the successful defense by the attorneys of Addabbo and Greenberg in sex crimes cases:
Our client, a 36-year-old female, was arrested and charged with two counts of Class “A” Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance, the most serious charges contained in the Penal Law of the State of New York. Her husband was also charged and arrested. The evidence against our client consisted of observations by undercover officers and wiretap conversations. Immediately, a Writ of Habeas Corpus was brought to lower her bail and, within 2wks after her arrest, she was released on bail. Upon examining the wiretaps, it became clear to Criminal Defense attorney Todd Greenberg that our client did not have the necessary “intent” to participate in the drug sale and that she became an unknowing participant in her husband’s criminal activity by picking up and dropping off packages. Mr. Greenberg, Esq. and Ms. Caitlin Quvus, Esq., were able to establish to the District Attorney that our client was used by her husband codefendant without knowledge and intent to violate the Law. Our persistence paid off: on October 3rd, 2018, the District Attorney consented to a resolution of the case with a plea to Disorderly Conduct, a Violation and not a Crime. Our client, who would have had not only serious criminal consequences but also immigration consequences if she were found guilty, is now free of any criminal record and could go on with her life. For the best possible results in a criminal matter, contact New York criminal attorney Todd Greenberg, Esq. or Caitlin Quvus, Esq. at (718)268-0400 or visit our firm’s website at www.addabboandgreenberg.com.
After a two-week Suppression Hearing involving testimony from police officers, detectives and a psychiatrist for the Defense and a psychiatrist for the Prosecution, all statements made by our client, who was charged with Arson and Assault, were suppressed as a matter of Law. Knowledge of the Law and extensive preparation in presenting Psychiatric testimony, resulted in the Constitutional Rights of our client being upheld. When an incriminating statement is made by a defendant in police custody, the Prosecution has a “heavy burden” of proving that the statement was voluntarily given. In the case of a mentally ill Defendant, more than a simple recitation of the Miranda Warning is required: New York’s highest Court has set forth that “The People must establish that the Defendant grasped that he or she did not have to speak to the interrogator…” In the case at bar, Addabbo and Greenberg attorney’s Todd Greenberg and Caitlin Young were able to prove that although the Defendant responded “yes” to a waiver of his Miranda Warning, that, in actuality, he did not “grasp” the meaning of those warnings. The Court held, in suppressing all statements, that “…clearly the Defendant suffers from a mental illness and appears, based upon the People’s own witnesses, that he was suffering from some form of illness in the way he reacted to law enforcement officers that basically was described by both officers who testified regarding the Defendant’s bizarre behavior”. Mr. Greenberg’s extensive courtroom experience was key in eliciting the proper testimony that the Judge relied on. Ms. Caitlin Young, Esq., prepared a detailed and well written legal brief that highlighted the factual issues and the Law, which ultimately the Court adopted. No matter how bleak your situation is, the lawyers of Addabbo and Greenberg will fight for you and bring forth all issues that will help achieve the best resolution. At Addabbo and Greenberg, we have handled numerous cases involving mentally ill defendants and are familiar with issues involving such clients in the Criminal Justice System. Call us at (718)268-0400 or visit our firm’s website at www.addabboandgreenberg.com.
On August 16th, 2017 our client was acquitted by a New York County Jury of Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance, a Class “B” Felony, as well as Possession with Intent to Sell. The District Attorney told the jury that this was an “open and shut case” for a conviction based on the fact there was a video of the sale, which allegedly took place at the Marquee Club in New York, as well as being witnessed by a security guard. At Trial, the District Attorney played the video, called the alleged buyer to the stand and also the security guard who stated he was 5 feet away and witnessed the sale. Significantly, at the Pretrial Hearing, based on the Cross Examination skills of New York Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg and his knowledge of the Law, all statements and items seized upon our client’s arrest was suppressed in that the People failed to establish “Probable Cause”. Put simply, the District Attorney presenting the case failed to put enough facts into the Hearing to establish the predicate for the arrest! Therefore, the evidence at Trial consisted of an alleged drug sale without any money being recovered from the Defendant! Please call Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg if you need help and for the best result! Call us at (718)268-0400 or reach us at QueensLaw.com.
One March 10th, 2016, our client was acquitted of all charges involving Criminal Possession of Marijuana. It was alleged that our client was in possession of approximately fifty (50) pounds of marijuana recovered from a house in Queens, New York. New York Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg argued that the District Attorney failed to present evidence proving “constructive possession” of the marijuana beyond a reasonable doubt which ultimately resulted in the acquittal. Most significantly, the Defendant was allegedly seen leaving the house by undercover police who were conducting surveillance with a bag containing three or four pounds of marijuana and was followed to a location where he made an alleged sale to a third party who was also arrested. However, On November 16th, 2015, a Queens County Supreme Court Judge suppressed the recovery of the marijuana that was found in the bag and United States currency that was allegedly given to my client for the purchase. (See Suppression of Marijuana Granted in Felony Drug Case, below). Without that evidence at trial, the District Attorney could not make the connection to the fifty pounds of marijuana found in the house. The cycle has now been completed: based on Mr. Greenberg’s hard work the Defendant was ” NOT GUILTY!” of all charges. Once again, knowledge of the Law, extensive experience in cross-examination of police witnesses and persistence and dedication in preparing pretrial motions and trial preparation, resulted in a complete acquittal of all Felony drug charges. If you are arrested and charged with narcotic possession or sale of a drug call New York Criminal Defense Attorney Todd Greenberg for the best results at (718)268-0400 or reach us through QueensLaw.com.
Suppression of Marijuana Granted in Felony Drug Case
On November 16 th, 2015, a Queens County Supreme Court Judge suppressed the recovery of pounds of marijuana and United States currency based on an illegal search and seizure of a vehicle. A Dunnaway/Mapp Hearing was held where police officers of the Field Intelligence Unit testified that they went to a location based on an “anonymous tip” and saw our client get into the driver’s seat of a van with a paper bag that appeared full. The police testified that the van pulled over, a person got in and the police observed, from outside the van, an alleged drug transaction where United States currency was given to our client, the driver, and a bag was given to the buyer. After pulling our client out of the car, handcuffing him and doing the same to the alleged buyer, the police looked in the bag and discovered approximately five pounds of marijuana. Based on a legal Brief submitted by Criminal Defense attorney Todd Greenberg, it was pointed out to the Court that the tip received was vague, that the officers failed to testify that they had any special training in drug transactions, that the exchange of a brown paper bag and money alone were not circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe a crime was being committed and that the police actually took our client into custody before any drugs was observed. In sum and substance, Mr. Greenberg argued that there were absolutely no facts to indicate that there was probable cause for an arrest or for a search of the vehicle. Suppression granted! Most significantly, Mr. Greenberg was retained after pretrial hearings were denied in that prior counsel failed to prepare proper moving papers and the case was scheduled for trial. Immediately upon being retained, Mr. Greenberg reviewed the file, moved to reargue pretrial motions and was granted hearings. If Mr. Greenberg had not seen that the Suppression Hearing was wrongfully denied the case would have proceeded to trial. However, instead, all evidence was suppressed and cannot be used in Court. Knowledge of the law, knowledge of how to cross examine police witnesses and persistence and dedication in preparing a legal Brief that essentially the Court adopted, resulted in the Constitutional Rights of our client being upheld. If you are arrested and charged with narcotic possession or sale call Queens Attorney Todd Greenberg for the best results at (718)268-0400 or reach us through QueensLaw.com.
On May 5th, 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!
All criminal charges have been dismissed against the Defendant, a young man with a good job, who was wrongfully charged with Criminal Possession of a Control Substance in the Third Degree, a Class “B” Felony. Upon being retained, Queens Criminal attorney Todd Greenberg commenced an investigation and confirmed that the Defendant, while waiting outside a barbershop for a haircut, saw a friend and got in his car. A short time later, undercover police officers swarmed the car, arrested the Defendant and his friend, and found a large amount of cocaine and United States currency in of the car. After a full investigation by Mr. Greenberg, the District Attorney of Queens County dismissed all charges. Once again, the prompt investigation conducted by attorney Todd Greenberg and his ability to present a client’s case, convinced the Queens County District Attorney to dismiss all charges.
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.
Criminal Defense Case Results
Addabbo & Greenberg Criminal Verdicts
Sentence In Fraternity Hazing Death: "Greenberg said sentencing process was extremely fair"."The judge took into consideration all of the mitigating factors in this case,” he said. “There’s no question that this is a tragic incident with regard to Michael Deng and tragic to Mr. Lam and his co-defendants in the sense that they were young men on the right track and nobody intended this to happen."