Misdemeanor Theft Crimes

Published on: August 27, 2012

More than an NY PL 155.25 or NY PL 165.40 Shoplifting Arrest: Additional Criminal Charges for Possessing Bolt Cutters, Clippers & Similar Tools

The tens of millions of dollars, if not more, are spent policing New York’s department and retails stores against shoplifting. With security officers routinely apprehending customers in such stores as Century 21, Bloomingdales and Macys in Manhattan as well as similar stores in Brooklyn, Westchester and Queens, it is no surprise that police are arresting and Assistant District Attorneys are prosecuting Petit Larceny and Criminal Possession of Stolen Property crimes with regularity. Baring these arrests being made for felony shoplifting in excess of $1,000 (Grand Larceny and felony Criminal Possession of stolen Property crimes such as NY PL 155.30(1) and NY PL 165.45(1)), the usual arrest or Desk Appearance Ticket charges for a shoplifter are the misdemeanor crimes of Petit Larceny (NY PL 155.25) and Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Fifth Degree (NY PL. 165.40). However, in certain circumstances, regardless of the felony or misdemeanor shoplifting theft charge you face, another crime can end up on the criminal court complaint.

A crime that New York shoplifting lawyers often see added onto these crimes involves incidents where you are accused of cutting off tags, sensors and security devices. As a preliminary matter, the value of the property stolen still dictates the larceny charge, but those theft charges will not be the only ones. Further, the possession of these tools to remove tags and sensors can complicate your case from a practical position. For example, it is easier to argue a New York City shoplifting arrest was a lapse in judgement, misunderstanding or a genuine mistake if you walked off with clothing. These same actions are more difficult to mitigate or challenge legally if in your purse or bag you are in possession of the scissors, screw driver, clippers, etc. On its face it appears that your actions may have been more premeditated.

Published on: July 24, 2012

Problems & Issues Beyond Jail: Further Ramifications for NY Lawyers & Attorneys Convicted of Theft & Fraud

By Jeremy Saland

As a New York theft lawyer and a defense attorney, I routinely represent clients in Grand Larceny arrests, indictments and investigations in the New York City region. In this capacity I find myself counseling professionals to recognize the collateral consequences and ramifications of a New York theft and fraud arrest beyond of the four walls of the criminal court. In fact, only last week, I drafted an entry as to the suspension of a lawyer who had initially been arrested for Grand Larceny and later pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor theft crime of Petit Larceny. The following case I am about to address further “hits home” the gravity of a larceny conviction – misdemeanor or felony – upon the professional licensing of attorneys in New York. Whether you are stealing from an escrow account, shoplifting or perpetrating a theft in the form of a tax crime, understand there can, and often will, be consequences should your case not be handled properly.

In Matter of Maffia, D34357, NYLJ 1202547493906, at *1 (App. Div. 2nd, Decided March, 27, 2012), the Grievance Committee moved to confirm a Special Referee’s report of professional misconduct for an attorney was was convicted in Suffolk County of Petit Larceny pursuant to New York Penal Law 155.25. As I have noted many times, NY PL 155.25, whether by shoplift or theft of monies, is a wrongful taking of another’s property regardless of how insignificant the value may be. Petit Larceny is an “A” misdemeanor. In the case before the Grievance Committee, although respondent (defendant) did not admit to it, prosecution accused the defendant of stealing $5,743 and as part of the plea deal required him to make restitution.

Published on: July 16, 2012

Potential Secondary Punishment & Consequences for Shoplifting Arrests in New York: Censure & Disbarment for Lawyers & Attorneys

By Jeremy Saland

A New York shoplifting arrest, whether it be in violation of New York Penal Law 155.25, New York Penal Law 155.30, New York Penal Law 165.40 or New York Penal Law 165.45, is an extremely serious crime with enormous secondary and collateral consequences. Believing otherwise is both naive and foolish. An arrest for Petit Larceny, Grand Larceny or Criminal Possession of Stolen Property will not automatically land you in jail or result in a criminal record, but for professionals – lawyers, teachers, doctors, financial services employees and others – there are very real and significant issues in terms of careers and livelihood. Remember, while each case, arrest and allegation for a larceny or theft crime may share similarities with others, each offense and person accused is distinct and separate. The following case is worth reading to understand what can happen to you upon the close of your case and to identify issues that you should discuss with your New York shoplifting lawyer or theft attorney from the onset of your criminal allegation.

In Matter of Gallagher, M-472, NYLJ 1202558663857, at *1 (App. Div. 1st, Decided June 7, 2012), Mr. Gallagher, the respondent, appeared before the Departmental Disciplinary Committee in reference to his law license and privilege to practice law in the State of New York. Prior to the disciplinary hearing, the respondent (a defendant at that time) faced a felony complaint charging him with two violations of Fourth Degree Grand Larceny (New York Penal Law 155.30(1) for shoplifting property from Bergdorf Goodman in Manhattan. The property was valued at $2,500. NY PL 155.30, Fourth Degree Grand Larceny, is committed if and when property is stolen – whether from a bank account or a store – valued between over $1,000 and $3,000.

Published on: July 7, 2012

Fraudulent Accosting: Must You be Involved in a “Confidence Game” to Violate NY PL 165.30; “Trick” & “Swindle” Constitutionally Vague?

By Jeremy Saland

New York theft and larceny comes in too many forms and is perpetrated in too many ways to set forth in one blog entry. Usually, the police can justify an arrest in New York City or elsewhere by taking your alleged conduct and squeezing into one statute or another found in the New York Penal Law. Whether that offense is a degree of Grand Larceny or Criminal Possession of Stolen Property, there are ample other statues that Assistant District Attorneys can prosecute your for violating. Although not seen that often in “high end” frauds and thefts, on of those crimes that experienced New York larceny and theft attorneys see is Fraudulent Accosting pursuant to New York Penal Law 165.30.

A New York Penal Law Article 165 offense (this section of the New York Penal Law defines and sets forth misdemeanor and felony Criminal Possession of Stolen Property crimes), NY PL 165.30 is an “A” misdemeanor that is punishable by as much as a year in jail. Very briefly, a person is guilty of Fraudulent Accosting if and when that person is in a public place and has an intent to defraud another person out of money or property regardless of the value. Further that person must accost his or her target and defraud him or her out of their money or property by “means of a trick, swindle or confidence game.” There is a legal presumption found in the law that relates to confidence games that will not be addressed here.

Published on: June 23, 2012

“Doubling Up” on a Turnstile: Can Two People Be Charged with Theft of Services (NY PL 165.15) for “Jumping” a Turnstile Together

By Jeremy Saland

Usually an offense perpetrated in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and other New York City locations, Theft of Services (New York Penal Law 165.15) is a crime that often results in a Desk Appearance Ticket (DAT) type arrest. While far from a felony crime, arrests for NY PL 165.15 are not without collateral and direct consequences. In fact, it is usually those people who have most at stake or those most in danger of bearing the brunt of those penalties are the individuals who are arrested. While a review of the Theft of Services statute, consequences of the crime and DAT process is available through the links peppered throughout this blog entry, the purpose of this entry is to address a recent Brooklyn Court decision relevant to the defense of NY PL 165.15.

Before proceeding, whether you received a New York City Desk Appearance Ticket for Theft of Services or you spent a night in jail waiting to see a judge, the crime of NY PL 165.15 is the same. That is, if you intentionally avoid or attempt to avoid paying for subway / public transportation by deception, stealth or some other method and you actually obtain or attempt to obtain the particular service, you are guilty of this misdemeanor crime. Collateral consequences to immigration or careers in finance aside, Theft of services is punishable by no more than one year in jail.

Published on: June 12, 2012

Recent Unexplained Possession of Stolen Property: The Ramifications of Certain Statements & Testimony in a New York Criminal Possession of Stolen Property Case

By Jeremy Saland

Although each case is unique and requires its own assessment, it is rarely, if ever, beneficial to speak to the police without a lawyer. You may think you are smarter or have the right answers to their questions, but you could be damning yourself and giving prosecutors the tools to make a conviction stick. Should you testify in your own defense in the Grand Jury or at trial, failure to consult with a criminal defense attorney can be equally dangerous. Cases in New York involving Criminal Possession of Stolen Property, Article 165 of the New York Penal Law, are certainly not immune from this pitfall. Whether you are charged with misdemeanor Fifth Degree Criminal Possession of Stolen Property (New York Penal Law 165.40) or the felony varieties of Fourth, Third, Second or First Degree Criminal Possession of Stolen Property (New York Penal Law 165.45, 165.50, 165.52 and 165.54 respectively), your statement or admission prior to consulting with a New York theft and stolen property attorney will likely leave you facing a more daunting defensive task. Implausible testimony at trial may compromise your liberty and legal predicament further. While any statement can be damning, this New York theft and larceny blog entry will address a principle in the New York criminal law called “unexplained or falsely explained possession of recently stolen property.”

In People v Mangual, 13 A.D.3d 734 (3rd Dept. 2004), the defendant was convicted after trial of Second Degree Burglary (New York Penal Law 140.25), Fourth Degree Grand Larceny (New York Penal Law 155.30) and Fifth Degree Criminal Possession of Stolen Property (New York Penal Law 165.40). The thefts all occurred when the defendant stole items from an apartment. At trial, a prosecution witness testified that he saw two bags with soccer logos left unattended on the street. Looking closer, a name appeared on the bag of a woman who lived in the neighborhood. The defendant drove up a short time later, picked up the bag and drove off. Before leaving, the defendant stated in substance that he was there for the bags. The witness jotted down the license plate number and spoke to the complainant who confirmed nobody had authority to take her property. Both the witness and the complainant then went to the complainant’s home and learned of the burglary.

Published on: June 6, 2012

Queens DA: Bag Handler at JFK Steals $20K from Passenger’s Bag

By Jeremy Saland

It seems that no matter where you turn, someone, somewhere is being charged with a theft or larceny crime in New York. Certainly, baggage handlers at New York City’s airports at JFK and LaGuardia are not immune from these arrests. According to District Attorney Richard Brown, the Queens County District Attorney’s Office is prosecuting another alleged case of fraud and theft by airport personnel. Rajendranauth Ramsahai, a baggage cart employee who works at John F. Kennedy International Airport, is accused of stealing some cash from a bag that was left in an airport parking lot. Not just “some cash,” prosecutors claim that there was $20,000 cash inside the computer bag.

Mr. Ramsahai is charged with two crimes. The more serious offense, Third Degree Grand Larceny, is a “D” felony. As such, New York Penal Law 155.35 is punishable by a sentence of up to two and one third to seven years in prison. The lesser crime, the misdemeanor of Petit Larceny, is an “A” misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail. Petit Larceny, New York Penal Law 155.25, as well as Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, are both based in the same language. In substance, if you steal property belonging to another person you are guilty of the lesser offense of NY PL 155.25. This is true regardless of the value. However, in order for prosecutors to prove the felony of NY PL 155.35 beyond a reasonable doubt they must prove this theft as well as the value of the property exceeding $3,000, but not greater than $50,000.

Published on: June 4, 2012

Understanding the Elements of “Accosting” & “Public Place” in a Fraudulent Accosting – New York Penal Law 165.30 – Arrest

By Jeremy Saland

Far from the most common and equally far from being one of the more complex white collar fraud and theft crimes in New York, Fraudulent Accosting, pursuant to New York Penal Law 165.30, is nonetheless a serious offense. In fact, as a misdemeanor crime, NY PL 165.30 is punishable by up to one year in jail on either Rikers Island or the local jail in the county where you were arrested. Briefly, you are guilty of Fraudulent Accosting if and when, in a public place, you accost another person with the intent to defraud that person into giving you money or property by means of a trick, swindle or confidence game. Breaking this down further, in order for you to be guilty of Fraudulent Accosting you must (1) accost another person, (2) in a public place, (3) while having the intent to defraud that other person of money or property, and (4) do so by trick, swindle, or confidence game. See Jury Charges in NY Criminal Cases §35.08 (H. Leventhal ed. 1989).

As with many criminal statutes, a definition or statement of elements rarely, by itself, is clear enough to define a crime. To better understand criminal offenses, a review of court decisions is not merely helpful, but sometimes critical. To that end, a recent decision stemming from New York County (Manhattan) is worthy of review as it sheds greater light on New York Penal Law 165.30. In People v. Rodney Watts, 2011CN010203, NYLJ 1202556652476, at *1 (Crim., NY, Decided May 22, 2012), the prosecutors charged the defendant with Fraudulent Accosting after he allegedly sold four tickets to the Book of Mormon for $800. The tickets turned out to be fraudulent and counterfeit tickets. The criminal court complaint (actually called an information) stated that the incident occurred inside 335 Avenue of the Americas and when the defendant met with the undercover police officer he stated in substance that he was there to meet for the tickets. The question before the court was whether or not the information (complaint) was legally sufficient to establish the charge of Fraudulent Accosting. Although the court analyzed various elements, the main two it address involved the definitions of “accost” and “public place.”

Published on: May 29, 2012

Establishing Knowledge of Criminal Possession of Stolen Property: Understanding Circumstantial Evidence in a New York Penal Law Article 165 Arrest

By Jeremy Saland

A sister crime that is equal to Grand Larceny and Petit Larceny, but established through distinct elements in New York, is Criminal Possession of Stolen Property. Ranging from an “A” misdemeanor up to varying felonies, Criminal Possession of Stolen Property encompasses both actual possession of stolen property and constructive possession of the same. The latter of these types of possessions involve situations where an individual might have control over an area where the stolen property is recovered. For example, instead of cash, stolen credit cards or or other property being recovered from an accused’s pocket, that same property may still be attributable to the defendant if it is recovered from the accused’s nightstand or vehicle console.

Regardless of how one is alleged to possess stolen property or the value of that property, one must still have the requisite knowledge that one is possessing property that is stolen. After all, if your criminal defense attorney can argue that the $7,500 Breitling watch on your wrist may be stolen, but you possessed it without the requisite knowledge that it was stolen, then you have not perpetrated Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Third Degree in violation of New York Penal Law 165.50. So, if knowledge is an essential component or element to any Article 165 crime, how can prosectors establish and New York criminal defense attorneys defend against this knowledge element? Barring an admission that you knew you had possessed stolen property, what type of circumstantial evidence can be used against you or in support of an Assistant District Attorney’s claim?

Published on: May 24, 2012

When Theft of Services is Actually a Grand Larceny: Distinguishing Services from Commodities in a NY Grand Larceny Arrest

By Jeremy Saland

While the overlap between Petit Larceny and the varying degrees of Grand Larceny in New York is clear (Petit Larceny is a “lesser included offense” of Grand Larceny), what is the relationship between Theft of Services and those larceny offenses? Are Theft of Services and Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, for example, mutually exclusive? If one is charged can the other be part of the same arrest as well? If you are stealing a service can you also be stealing property in a manner to satisfy the elements of any New York Penal Law Article 155 crime? In short, the answer to all of this is “yes.”

Briefly, Theft of Services, pursuant to New York Penal Law 165.15, is a misdemeanor offense punishable by up to a year in jail. This crime is often associated with arrests in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, etc., where one intentionally fails to pay a tab at a restaurant or from a cab driver. NY PL 165.15 is a misdemeanor and, in the circumstances above, one is often issued a Desk Appearance Ticket (DAT) at the time of one’s arrest. Although Theft of Services is a crime, New York larceny crimes are equal to and much more serious than this offense. If you intentionally steal property of another (this is not the exact definition), then you are guilty of at least the misdemeanor of Petit Larceny. Should the value exceed $1,000, $3,000, $50,000 or $1,000,000 you are guilty of Fourth, Third, Second or First Degree Grand Larceny respectively. These crimes are felony offenses that have maximum sentences ranging from four years in prison to twenty-five years.