Case Results

Criminal Defense Law Firm | Duty Assault Allegation Suspension of Imposition of Sentence

In New York, workplace assault allegations involving supervisory personnel often trigger immediate criminal exposure because physical contact during the performance of duties can be interpreted as “intentional bodily injury” under New York Penal Law §§120.00 and 120.05. When the accused is in a position of authority and the complainant is performing a sensitive safety related assignment, prosecutors frequently treat the matter more seriously, raising the risk of arrest, career disruption, and long term criminal consequences. In this case, a criminal defense law firm in New York represented a security supervisor who was accused of striking an on duty guard during a workplace confrontation. Although the allegation initially appeared to support a misdemeanor assault charge, the defense reconstructed the incident, demonstrated the impulsive and non malicious nature of the conduct, and secured a conditional dismissal that allowed the client to avoid a criminal conviction entirely. This analysis provides insight into how an experienced criminal defense law firm in New York approaches sensitive workplace assault investigations, resolves credibility disputes, and mitigates the risk of lasting criminal exposure.

Criminal Defense Attorney in NYC | Non-Prosecution in an Employee Misappropriation & Grant Diversion Investigation

The following case study examines how a criminal defense attorney in NYC defended an employee who had been wrongfully implicated in an internal financial misconduct investigation. The matter involved allegations of employee misappropriation and unlawful diversion of grant funds within a nonprofit-style organization headquartered in New York City. Prosecutors initially considered potential charges under New York Penal Law provisions governing larceny (§155), criminal possession of stolen property (§165), and falsifying business records (§175) because the client's bank account was used as a temporary transfer point for organization related funds.Throughout the case, the criminal defense attorney in NYC demonstrated that the client acted under coercive pressure from a superior, did not obtain personal benefit, lacked criminal intent, and attempted to resist the unlawful directive. The attorney’s structured intervention ultimately persuaded prosecutors to decline prosecution, resulting in complete closure of the case without charges.This case highlights how employees in New York can become unintentionally entangled in organizational financial irregularities and how early representation is essential to preventing wrongful criminal exposure.

Fraud Report Form Case | Abetting Fraud Allegation, Suspended Sentence

In Washington D.C., allegations involving fraud, identity deception, and financial loss are prosecuted under several provisions of the D.C. Code, particularly § 22-3221 (Fraud) and § 22-1810 (Aiding and Abetting). When an individual unknowingly assists a criminal enterprise such as transporting unlawfully obtained funds or providing account access prosecutors may still pursue charges based on the person’s conduct, regardless of intent. This case examines how a defense team employed a structured legal strategy to protect a client who was unintentionally involved in a fraudulent operation after being misled by third parties. Through detailed factual investigation, mitigation development, and a comprehensive submission similar to a fraud report form, the defense secured a suspended sentence that prevented immediate incarceration.This matter highlights how early legal intervention, accurate documentation, and a well structured narrative addressing statutory elements are critical when navigating fraud related accusations in Washington D.C.

Criminal Defense Attorney New York | Non Prosecution in a Petit Larceny E Scooter Incident

The following case study examines how a criminal defense attorney in New York defended a client accused of petit larceny after temporarily taking an unattended electric scooter from a sidewalk. The matter shows how misunderstandings involving shared mobility devices can escalate into criminal allegations under New York Penal Law when property owners report an unauthorized taking. It also reflects how early intervention, structured mitigation, and accurate presentation of intent can lead to a non prosecution outcome. Throughout the case, the criminal defense attorney New York emphasized the absence of criminal intent, prompt return of property, and meaningful rehabilitative steps, all of which aligned with prosecutorial discretion standards within New York County.