Wednesday, February 5, 2014

Michael Pollok article in the New York Law Journal

Use Video Hook-Ups for Arraignments

, New York Law Journal
    |0 Comments
The Dutchess County Public Defender's plan to provide attorneys at certain arraignments in selected courts (see Jan. 9, New York Law Journal article, "Judges Concerned With Role in Criminal Defense Plan") is not only unworkable, it may invite a flood of legal challenges from the defendants who will continue to be denied counsel at arraignments.
One of the primary purposes of providing an attorney at arraignment is to obtain the necessary information from the defendant to convey to the judge so he or she can make an intelligent decision on bail. The fundamental right to counsel at arraignments has been denied to defendants in New York since before the founding of this country and in most upstate courts, the unfortunate practice continues on a daily basis despite the Court of Appeals ruling in Hurrell-Harring v. State, 15 N.Y.3d 8, 930 N.E.2d 217 (2010).
Not only does this unconstitutional practice deny defendants their Sixth Amendment right to have counsel present at a critical stage of a criminal proceeding, the taxpayers are required to pay for the unnecessary detention of defendants in our overcrowded county jails. It is common practice at late night or weekend arraignments to impose bail on indigent unrepresented defendants who are inevitably sent to the county jails because they cannot afford the bail imposed based upon incomplete information. Worse, they languish in the county jails at taxpayer expense to wait for the next court appearance, which might be weeks away because many town and village courts meet once per month.
If all defendants are represented by counsel at arraignments, as Hurrell-Harring intends, judges can ascertain through counsel, the facts necessary to make an informed decision regarding bail. A judge may understandably feel compelled to impose bail because he or she lacks sufficient information to establish community ties, cannot inquire of the defendant as to his or her version of the facts of the case, or the judge is unable to effectively communicate with the unrepresented defendant who may not speak English or is simply inarticulate due to fear.
While we should applaud initiatives to comply with Hurrell-Harring and provide counsel at arraignments when a crime is charged, the plan proposed by the Dutchess County Public Defender, which provides counsel to some defendants in selected courts is terribly flawed in my opinion. Justice Steinberg is correct in his observations and I would venture further to say that defendants who are detained and not provided counsel at arraignment from the Public Defender will justifiably raise appellate, post-conviction and civil rights challenges later. Why should a defendant in Hyde Park Town Court charged with a petty larceny receive the benefit of a Public Defender at arraignment while a defendant in Rhinebeck Town Court charged with murder, receive no attorney because the Public Defender arbitrarily decides not to cover Rhinebeck arraignments?
Given the decision in Hurrell-Harring, under County Law §722, each judge should first attempt to contact the Public Defender for every arraignment. If the Public Defender is unable or unwilling to send an attorney to represent the defendant, the judge should assign a qualified private (18-B) attorney to handle the arraignment.
Alternatively, if the counties do not wish to pay for 18-B counsel at arraignments, an assistant public defender could attend each arraignment remotely using Skype since most courtrooms now have laptops with built-in cameras and a connection to the Internet. The assistant public defender could confer with the defendant on the telephone and then proceed with the arraignment by video conferencing. Courts across the country have been arraigning defendants using video conferencing technology for years and we could do it in New York to comply with Hurrell-Harring.

Michael S. Pollok
Red Hook


Read more: http://www.newyorklawjournal.com/id=1202638331447/Use-Video-Hook-Ups-for-Arraignments#ixzz2sRCZVLnt
http://www.dailyfreeman.com/general-news/20140204/driver-accused-of-killing-bard-college-students-surrenders-license-case-heads-to-grand-jury-videos




Monday, May 13, 2013


Know Your Rights When Arrested
         Although the problem of drunk driving remains a very serious problem in the United States, aggressive enforcement and substantial fines have forced the number of drunk driving incidents down over the past ten years. Seehttp://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html. 
            This article uses the example of a drunk driving arrest to address some of the more common concerns clients raise after they have been arrested. The article is only intended to be informational and is not legal advice because every case is different and the facts of an arrest can be complex and should be carefully discussed with an attorney specializing in criminal defense law. Nor should this article be read as condoning drunk or impaired driving which maims and kills tens of thousands of innocent people each year and is the cause of about one-third of all traffic accidents in the United States. Id
1. If arrested, remain silent and ask for your attorney.
            If you are arrested, you have several rights including the right to remain silent and assistance from an attorney. Also known as Miranda rights, these are two of your most important constitutional rights as a citizen and you should not make any statements to the police without the aid of counsel and immediately request an attorney. Any statement you make to the police or anyone else will be used against you even if you think your statement is innocuous or helpful. Be respectful, polite and simply inform the officer that you wish to speak to an attorney before you decide whether to make any statements. This simple, polite request will "activate" important constitutional rights designed to protect you and deter police misconduct. The police will often tell arrestees that “it will go easier” if you make a statement and/or not involve an attorney but this is false and merely a tactic to improve their case against you. The police, prosecutors and judges cannot punish you for exercising your constitutional right to an attorney or for declining to make a statement without the aid of counsel.  Once you tell a member of law enforcement that you wish to speak to an attorney, all custodial questioning must stop so ask to make that call to an attorney before answering any questions. If you are under 16 years old, the police must immediately notify your parents that you have been arrested and cannot question you until your parents arrive and call an attorney. New York Family Court Act § 305.2[3], [7]. 
2. What help can I get while I am being arrested? 
            An attorney can help you make certain decisions during an arrest.  Apart from deciding upon whether to make a statement, one of the most common examples is deciding whether to take a breathalyzer or blood test in a drunk driving case. You may refuse to take a Breathalyzer or blood test but doing so will almost certainly result in the revocation of your license for at least one year.  Because the law requires the police to take a blood or Breathalyzer test within a certain amount of time, the police may declare that you are refusing to take the test if you delay them. For that reason, you should immediately ask for an attorney to help you decide whether to take the test or answer any questions. If the police refuse your request to speak with an attorney, note the time and proceed with the test (subject to the guidelines below) but your right to counsel has “attached” and may result in the suppression of the test results and any statements made after the request for an attorney. Since most people carry cell phones, you should have your attorney’s phone number saved in your phone and tell the officer you wish to use your cell phone to call him. A request for a lawyer must be explicit and questions to the police like: “should I call an attorney?” or “do I need an attorney?” have been held by the courts to be an insufficient request for an attorney.
 3. Should I take a Breathalyzer test?
            The decision to take a breath or blood test must be decided on a case-by-case basis after considering several factors. The primary consideration is whether the loss of your license for at least one year for refusing the test is better than assisting the police prosecute you for DWI. Most often, criminal defense lawyers encourage clients to consent to the blood or Breathalyzer test because there are pathways to continue driving during and after your case has been resolved.  On the other hand, the minimum one-year revocation for refusing to take the test is virtually automatic after a DMV hearing.  New York is an “implied consent” state and you agree to take a breath or chemical test at the direction of law enforcement when you obtain your driver’s license. Thus, the penalty for not “honoring” that implied consent to take a chemical test is revocation of your license for at least one year even if you win the underlying DWI case. In certain cases where the client has been previously arrested for DWI, the decision to take the test is more difficult because a second DWI within ten years is a felony with the possibility of going to prison for up to four years. A third DWI offense in ten years is a felony with the possibility of going to prison for up to seven years.  The penalties can also be severe if someone is seriously injured or killed. In these circumstances, it may be wiser to refuse a blood or breath test and lose your license for a year rather than assist a felony prosecution by providing a Breathalyzer or blood test result.
4. If I refuse to take a breath test, can I be forced to take a blood test?
            In some cases, the police are authorized to take your blood to test the amount of alcohol in your blood. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Missouri v. McNeely that the police must obtain a warrant or similar court order to take your blood without your consent. A blood test is usually done (as opposed to a breath test) when the client is in an accident and is either unconscious or lacks the capacity to consent to a blood test. We will have to wait and see how the Supreme Court’s decision in McNeely will impact police behavior in New York.
5. If the police don’t get a blood or breath test result from me, can I still be convicted of DWI?
            Yes.  In New York, the prosecution can prove you were driving while intoxicated if your Blood Alcohol Concentration was .08% or higher. However, even if the police and prosecution do not have a blood alcohol concentration result from a blood or breath test, you will still be charged with “common law” driving while intoxicated. Although harder to prove without a chemical test result, drunk driving can be proved by the circumstances of your arrest witnessed by the officer or a civilian (including your passenger) testifying about your condition at the time of arrest. Here is a common example:

 

The officer testifies that he witnessed you driving erratically and pulled you over to give you a ticket for crossing the double-yellow line. Upon approaching your window to ask for your license and registration so he could write the ticket for the traffic infraction, he smelled alcohol emanating from your mouth and noticed you had glassy eyes and slurred speech. After asking you to exit the vehicle, he noticed that you staggered and were unsteady on your feet. At the point he administered a number of field sobriety tests (e.g., stand on one leg, walk a straight line, recite the alphabet, following a light or pen with you eyes, etc.), which he says you failed.  To further buttress a common law DWI case, motorists will often make statements in answer to the question, “have you been drinking tonight?”
            Courts have held that asking this question about how much you have had to drink, without first apprising the motorist of his right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, is permissible as part of a traffic stop investigation.  Officers also often ask motorists where you have been and where are you going hoping you will admit that you are coming from a bar. Nevertheless, you are not legally required to answer any of the officer’s questions and are only required to provide your license, vehicle registration and other relevant documentation like an insurance card. Never argue with the officer or tell him what you think the law is. Always be polite and respectful and follow his lawful directions such as exiting the vehicle and participating in field sobriety tests or taking a breath test. Do immediately ask for an attorney and do not answer the officer’s questions without the aid of counsel or give your consent to have the vehicle searched without the aid and advice of an attorney.
6. Don’t be afraid to assert your rights.
            Requesting an attorney and remaining silent does not “make you look guilty.”  On the contrary, asking for an attorney and declining to provide a statement without the benefit of counsel communicates to the police that you are a citizen who knows his or her constitutional rights and they should follow correct procedure because the arrest will be carefully scrutinized. While refusing to answer police questions and asking for an attorney may seem uncomfortable, impolite or provocative and it mayfeel like it makes your situation worse, in the long run, it is one of the few things you can do at the arrest scene to reduce your chances of getting a criminal conviction. The truth is, if you have been drinking and driving, there is little you can do to control the situation at the arrest stage of the case.  Asking for an attorney and remaining silent will not change the police officer’s behavior because if he has legal cause to believe you have been drinking and driving, he will arrest and charge you. Many people fear that if they assert their rights during the arrest, the police might hold them in detention longer or even tamper with the Breathalyzer test to inflate the results. While it is possible to contaminate a breath test sample, most officers will not risk their careers and criminal prosecution by falsifying test results. Furthermore, the New York State Court of Appeals had held that you must be brought before a judge to be arraigned (formally apprised of the charges and your release conditions set) within 24 hours of being arrested. These wait times are even shorter in upstate New York because most police stations do not have legally adequate holding cells or other facilities to detain prisoners for prolonged periods.  If a police officer detains you because you asserted your constitutional rights, it will only damage the prosecutor’s case and subject the officer to disciplinary action and/or a civil rights lawsuit.

If you have any questions about your criminal case, please give Michael Pollok a call at 845-514-2093 for a free consultation.

Wednesday, January 30, 2013







Police Processing

After you are arrested, in most cases, you will be taken to a police station, fingerprinted and photographed.  The officers will interview you and take down your pedigree information such as name, address, date of birth, height, weight eye color. You have a right to remain silent and not make any statements about the case but providing basic truthful pedigree information is the best course of action.  Providing a false name or pedigree information is a crime called criminal impersonation and withholding pedigree information will increase your chances of bail being imposed (see below).

After being processed at the police station, in less serious cases you will be given a desk appearance ticket (“DAT”) and released. The DAT is a slip of paper directing you to appear in court on a specific date and time.  It may also have an arrest number and section of the law you are accused of violating. In more serious cases, the police will transport you to court for an arraignment.

Arraignment

The arraignment is your initial court appearance in front of a judge in a town or village court, district court, city court or criminal court. These are all considered lower criminal court’s in New  York that initially handle all criminal cases including felonies. At the arraignment, the judge will read the charges and determine whether bail should be imposed or you should be released on your own recognizance (“ROR”). You are entitled to a copy of the charges and should ask for a copy if the judge does not provide them to you.

Bail is an amount of money you, a friend or family member “post” with the court to ensure that you return to court to face the charges. Bail is not a punishment, and should only be imposed if you are a “flight risk” or charged with certain dangerous felonies. Imposing bail because the judge does not like you or the facts of the case or for some other improper reason is unconstitutional because the presumption of innocence applies at arraignment and making bail determinations.

Cash bail and bail bonds

Usually bail may be posted in two forms: in cash or by bail bond.  The bail bond amount will generally be higher than the cash amount. Bail bonds must be obtained with the help of a licensed bail bondsman who reviews the finances of the person who wants to obtain the bond to make sure he or she can pay the bondsman should you run away. The bail bondsman usually imposes a fee (usually between 5%-15%) for the bond which is how they make money.  Different bondsmen will impose different fees so the person posting the bond should call around to compare fees. If you run away after bail is posted, the person who posted the bail will forfeit the amount of the bail, you will be charged with the felony of bail jumping and a warrant will be issued for your arrest. Bail (cash or bond) is refundable at the end of the case less a court imposed percentage that the court keeps as a fee. If the case is resolved in your favor, such as dismissal on the merits or acquittal after trial, you are entitled to a refund of the full  amount of bail without any fees being imposed.

Your right to an attorney at arraignment

New York’s highest court has held that you have the right to have an attorney present at your arraignment because it is a critical stage of a criminal case. If you are charged with a felony or serious misdemeanor and find yourself at an arraignment and you are not able to have your private attorney present or provided with an attorney to speak on your behalf, you should tell the judge that you do not wish to proceed with the arraignment until you are provided with an attorney experienced in criminal  law.  If you are not sure if the charge is serious enough to warrant bail, then ask the judge if he intends to impose bail and if so, you wish to have an attorney present to argue against the imposition of bail. If you cannot afford an attorney or your private attorney is not available for the arraignment, the court must provide an experienced attorney at arraignment free of charge.  If the court refuses to provide you with an attorney and proceeds with the arraignment, you should contact an attorney who will order the transcript of the arraignment and may move to vacate any bail that was set because the judge violated your Sixth Amendment right to counsel at arraignment.  Unfortunately, many courts in upstate New York routinely violate this Sixth Amendment requirement so you should insist on having an attorney speak on your behalf at your arraignment because it could mean the difference between having bail set and going to jail  or being released on your own recognizance while the case is pending.  Your chances of getting release or lower bail is greater with an attorney because judges often have very little information before them at an arraignment and your attorney can interview you, review the charges and then argue to the judge why you should be released. Judges tend to impose bail when they have insufficient information in an attempt to “cover” themselves which makes the role of an attorney at arraignment vital. If bail is imposed and you are able to post bail, you will be released from the court or from the jail. You will then be given a date and time for your next court appearance. Contact an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately.

*The opinions expressed in this blog are not to be deemed legal advice. Each criminal case is different and you should always consult an attorney familiar with the facts and circumstances of your individual case. For a free consultation regarding your criminal case in New York call 845-876-3024.

arrest_image
The right to counsel and to remain silent.
If you are arrested, do not make any statements to the police and immediately request an attorney. Any statement you make will be used against you even if you think your statement is innocuous or helpful.  Be respectful, polite and simply inform the officer that you wish to speak to an attorney before you decide whether to make any statements. This request will activate several important constitutional rights. The police will often tell citizens that “it will go easier” if you make a statement and/or not involve an attorney but this is false. Neither the police, prosecutors nor court can punish you for exercising your constitutional right to an attorney or decline to make a statement.  Once you tell a member of law enforcement that you wish to speak to an attorney, all questioning must stop so do not waive your right to an attorney and insist on making that call right away.
What help can I get while I am being arrested? 
You also have a right to speak to an attorney to help you make certain decisions during an arrest.  Apart from whether to make a statement, one of the most common examples is deciding whether to take a breathalyzer or blood test in a “drunk driving”case. You may refuse to take a breathalyzer or blood test but doing so will almost certainly result in a revocation of your license for at least one year.  Because the law requires the police to take a blood or breathalyzer test within two hours, the police may declare you are refusing to take the test if you delay them. For that reason, you should immediately ask to speak to an attorney to help you decide whether to take the test or answer any questions.  Since most people carry cell phones, you should have your attorney’s phone number saved in your phone and tell the officer you wish to use your cell phone to call him. Some officers will not afford you the opportunity to speak to an attorney which might result in the test results being suppressed (thrown out) so be sure to ask to speak to an attorney upon being stopped and tell the officer that you wish to use your cell phone to call your attorney. Do not believe the myth that requesting an attorney and remaining silent “makes you look guilty.”  On the contrary, asking for an attorney and declining to provide statements makes you look smart and most police officers would tell their friends and family members to follow this advice.
Should I take a breathalyzer test?
The decision to take a breath or blood test must be decided on a case by case basis after considering several factors. The primary consideration is whether the loss of your license for one year for refusing the test is better than assisting the police prosecute you for DWI. Most often we encourage clients to take the blood or breathalyzer test if offered within two hours because there are pathways to continue driving during and after your case has been resolved.  On the other hand, the one year revocation for refusing to take the test is virtually automatic after a DMV hearing.  New York is an “implied consent” state and you agree to take a breath or chemical test at the direction of law enforcement when you obtain your driver’s license. Thus, the penalty for not “honoring” that implied consent is revocation for at least a year even if you win the underlying DWI case. However, in cases where the client has been previously arrested for DWI, the decision to take the test is more difficult because a second DWI in ten years is a felony with the possibility of going to prison for up to four years. A third DWI offense in ten years is a felony with the possibility of going to prison for up to seven years.  The sentences can also be severe if someone is seriously injured or killed. In these circumstances, it may be wiser to refuse a blood or breath test rather than assist a felony prosecution by providing a breathalyzer or blood test result.
Can I be forced to take a blood or breath test?
In some cases, the police may be authorized to take your blood or compel you to take a breathalyzer. Most often your blood is taken without your expressed consent when you are in an accident and are either unconscious or lack the capacity to consent to a blood test.  In those circumstances, the police may draw your blood under the implied consent rule so long as the blood is drawn within two hours of the police arriving at the accident. The police also have the option to seek a court order to compel you to take a test if they can satisfy a court that you were drunk and operating a motor vehicle. Seeking a court order is rarely done because of the time constraints of the two hour rule and the relative unavailability of judges to immediately review and sign such orders.
If the police don’t get a blood or breath test result from me, can I still be convicted of DWI?
Yes.  Even if the police and prosecution do not have a blood alcohol concentration result from blood or breath testing, they may still charge you with “common law” driving while intoxicated. Although harder to prove, drunk driving can be proved by the circumstances of your arrest witnessed by the officer or a civilian (including your passenger) testifying about your condition at the time of arrest. Here is a common example:
The officer testifies that he witnessed you driving erratically and pulled you over for crossing the double yellow line. Upon approaching your window to ask for your license and registration so he could write the ticket for the traffic infraction, he smelled alcohol emanating from your mouth and noticed you had glassy eyes and slurred speech. After asking you to exit the vehicle, he noticed that you staggered and were unsteady on your feet. At the point he administered a number of field sobriety tests (stand on one leg, walk a straight line, recite the alphabet, following a light with you eyes, etc) which you failed.  To further buttress a common law DWI case, motorists will often make statements in answer to  the question, “have you been drinking tonight?”
Courts have held that asking this question about how much you have had to drink, without first apprising the motorist of his right to remain silent, is permissible as part of a traffic stop investigation. As discussed above, while refusing to answer questions and asking for an attorney may seem impolite or provocative and it may feel like it makes your situation worse, in the long run, it is one of the few thing you can do to reduce your chances of getting a criminal conviction for DWI.
Don’t be afraid to assert your rights.
The truth is, if you have been drinking and driving, there is little you can do to control the situation at the arrest stage of the case.  Asking for an attorney and remaining silent will not change the police officer’s behavior. Many people fear that if they assert their rights during the arrest, the police might hold them in detention longer or even tamper with the breathalyzer test to inflate the results. While it is possible to contaminate a breath test sample, most officers will not risk their careers and criminal prosecution by falsifying test results. Furthermore, you must be brought before a judge to be arraigned (formally apprised of the charges and release conditions set) within 24 hours of being arrested. If an officer detains you because you asserted your rights, it will only damage the prosecutor’s case and subject him to disciplinary action and/or a civil rights law suit.
*The opinions expressed in this blog are not to be deemed legal advice. Each criminal case is different and you should always consult an attorney familiar with the facts and circumstances of your individual case. For a free consultation regarding your criminal case in New York call 845-876-3024.

  1. Criminal Mischief

    Answered over 3 years ago.
    1. Michael Steven Pollok
    2.  
    3. Theodore W. Robinson
    4.  
    5. Michael Howard Joseph
    6.  
    7.  
    3 attorney answers
    Ask for a public defender if you cannot afford an attorney. Under the facts you have set forth, you should have the attorney speak to the prosecutor and seek an "adjournment in contemplation of dismissal" which puts the case over for six months and then it is dismissed and sealed if there are no new arrests. Since your daughter is 16 and has no priors, the worse case scenario is a youthful offender adjudication which is not a conviction and it is supposed to be sealed; but I have heard about...
  2. I'm an indigent defendant found guilty of a crime. Should the direct appeal fail, I want to be prepared for the next appeal.

    Answered 2 days ago.
    1. Joshua Sachs
    2.  
    3. Clifford M. Miller
    4.  
    5. Mary Catherine Bonner
    6.  
    7. Frank Mascagni III
    8.  
    9. Michael Steven Pollok
    10.  
    11.  
    5 attorney answers
    I sympathize with your situation and direct appeals can take years. You need to speak to an experienced appellate/post conviction attorney in the jurisdiction; whether it is is state court in Florida or federal court. Sadly, there are two justice systems in the US, one for the wealthy and one for the indigent.
    1 lawyer agreed with this answer