Aggravated Assault Sentencing Dismissed

Late at night, the client temporarily stopped his delivery vehicle on the roadside to organize packages.

A man approached, claiming the vehicle obstructed traffic and demanding that it be moved.

The client calmly explained that the vehicle posed no meaningful barrier, but the man became agitated.

The argument escalated verbally, and the man eventually called police, falsely claiming that the client assaulted him with the vehicle and engaged in unwanted sexual contact.

These accusations if believed could have triggered Aggravated Assault Sentencing exposure under New York assault statutes as well as misdemeanor level sexual misconduct charges.

Aggravated assault allegations may arise when an individual uses a car or other object in a threatening manner.

New York law allows prosecutors to pursue:

Assault in the Second Degree (NYPL §120.05): Causing injury with a dangerous instrument; punishable by up to 7 years in prison.
Assault in the Third Degree (NYPL §120.00): Intentional physical injury; Class A misdemeanor.

Any connection between the vehicle and alleged harm could have increased the client's Aggravated Assault Sentencing risk significantly.

The accuser also claimed forcible touching, which in New York is defined under NYPL §130.52.

It involves intentionally touching intimate parts for sexual gratification an allegation taken seriously and carrying a potential one year jail sentence.

Understanding intent is central; without sexual motivation, Sexual Misconduct charges cannot be sustained.

The defense focused on eliminating this element entirely during the Aggravated Assault Sentencing investigation.

The accuser alleged that the client used his vehicle to strike him an act that would trigger dangerous instrument analysis under Aggravated Assault Sentencing guidelines.

However, dash-cam footage showed only a minor vibration consistent with engine ignition, not collision.

There was no visible contact, no injury, and no evidence of intent.

The defense emphasized that the client attempted to defuse the situation by returning to his vehicle, demonstrating avoidance not aggression.

This lack of intent and lack of contact directly contradicted any basis for Aggravated Assault Sentencing.

The accuser also claimed the client touched him inappropriately during the verbal argument.

He presented an audio recording, but it captured only raised voices not physical contact or sexual language.

The defense highlighted that the recording lacked context and contained no evidence of sexual intent, a required element in New York Sexual Misconduct statutes.

By establishing the absence of sexual motivation, the defense removed a second pillar of the accuser’s claims further discrediting the viability of any charges, including those affecting Aggravated Assault Sentencing.

The client expressed deep gratitude after realizing how close he came to facing an arrest, criminal record, and the severe consequences associated with Aggravated Assault Sentencing.

By acting quickly and retaining experienced counsel, he avoided prosecution entirely, preserved his reputation, and prevented the case from reaching the district attorney’s office.

The outcome illustrates how evidence-driven defense and legal expertise can stop a false allegation before it grows into a full criminal matter.

SJKP helps clients facing violent-crime accusations navigate complex laws, evidence requirements, and Aggravated Assault Sentencing risks.

We evaluate footage, interview witnesses, analyze digital evidence, and create fact-based defense strategies tailored to the unique circumstances of each case.

If you are under investigation for assault, sexual misconduct, or a related offense, contact SJKP immediately for a confidential consultation and targeted defense plan designed to prevent wrongful prosecution.