Unlike most of the other charges in Chapter 220 of the Penal Law, this particular charge focuses on the value of the narcotics, rather than the weight or quantity of the narcotics. Of course, the value of a quantity of narcotics can be easily disputed. Interestingly, this charge also aggregates the narcotics trafficking over time, whereas most state-court drug cases involve single transactions. Also, many times, charges are brought without sufficient proof that the accused played a supervising role in an actual organization.

This Class A-I felony drug charge carries serious potential prison sentences, as even someone without a criminal record faces a minimum 15 years in prison, with a maximum of 25 years.

Matthew Galluzzo, an experienced criminal defense attorney and former Manhattan prosecutor, has extensive experience representing individuals accused of large-scale narcotics trafficking offenses in state and federal court. If you or a loved one have been accused of Operating as a Major Trafficker, you should strongly consider contacting him to discuss the case.

Mr. Galluzzo worked with a social worker to describe the client’s extremely difficult upbringing, which included parental abuse, poverty, homelessness, the foster care system, and drug abuse as a pre-teen. Mr. Galluzzo convinced the judge that pursuant to the recent Second Circuit decision in US v. Gibson, the client was not a Career Offender under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines despite his two prior convictions for NY Penal Law Section 220.39, resulting in his classification as a Criminal History Category IV instead of VI. He also convincingly described the overdose as a terrible accident and expressed his client’s remorse to the judge.

Ultimately, the Court granted a significant downward variance and gave him a sentence equal to roughly half that recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines, 120 months (10 years). The client was pleased with the result and felt that his voice had been heard. The case was US v. Huertero, 20-cr-580 (ER) before Judge Ramos.

If you or a loved one are facing federal narcotics charges resulting in an overdose, you should strongly consider contacting Matthew Galluzzo. A former federal prosecutor, he has experienced litigating against government prosecutors attempting to prove that defendants are responsible for fatal overdoses, and has effectively cross-examined scientific expert witnesses (doctors, toxicologists, pathologists, etc.) on the subject. He also knows how to effectively present requests for merciful treatment from sentencing judges. Give him a call to schedule a consultation.

Mr. Galluzzo practices primarily in the New York City area, as well as the federal courts of Connecticut, White Plains (NY), and New Jersey. However, he is also able to defend federal criminal cases in other jurisdictions under certain circumstances.

A similar federal statute relates to the importation of narcotics into the country from outside the country. 21 U.S.C. Section 952 makes it a federal felony to import controlled substances from any place outside of the United States. The maximum and minimum penalties for committing these crimes are set forth in 21 U.S.C. Section 960, and again generally depend upon the type and quantity of narcotic imported into the United States, and whether anyone died as a result of those narcotics.

A person does not have to be physically transporting narcotics to be guilt of this crime. Federal prosecutors routinely pursue people for conspiring with others to commit this crime, such that one defendant might be accused of physically transporting narcotics while other members of the members of the conspiracy play different roles in the planning and delivery of the narcotics or its proceeds. Indeed, these crimes are frequently charged along with 21 U.S.C. 846, the conspiracy statute.

Indictments accusing individuals of these crimes may be the result of long-term investigations into narcotics trafficking, by federal agents and undercover informants. Sometimes, however, a defendant simply discovered and arrested at the border with narcotics in his vehicle might also be prosecuted in federal court. These cases also sometimes begin with arrests by U.S. Customs at airports who find narcotics in passenger luggage.

Defendants in these cases might be able to prove that they were unaware that they were being used to transport narcotics, or act as unwitting mules. In other cases, they might have played a minor role worthy of a sentencing reduction. Some young offenders may be eligible for federal diversionary programs to avoid prison or the lifelong stain of a conviction.

For defendants with no such defense, it is critical that they have an experienced criminal defense attorney who can advocate for leniency from the judge and prosecutors. Some defendants in these cases have drug addictions that caused them to become involved in a criminal conspiracy. Others might be controlled or abused by their boyfriends or husbands. In these cases, Matthew Galluzzo tries to really get to know his clients so that he can best present them as human beings to the presiding judges.

Indeed, Matthew Galluzzo has successfully defended many individuals charged with federal narcotics crimes, including 21 U.S.C. 952 and 960. If you or a loved one have been arrested or charged with such a crime, or conspiring to commit one, you should contact Matthew Galluzzo immediately. Matthew Galluzzo has represented individuals charged in federal court with trafficking cocaine, crack-cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, GHB, MDMA (ecstasy), crystal methamphetamine, ketamine, fentanyl, marijuana, suboxone, prescription medication (Oxycontin, Oxycodone, Percocet, etc.), “Lean,” and other controlled substances. Matthew Galluzzo has also represented individuals accused of trafficking narcotics on the Dark Web.

Matthew Galluzzo parle francais. En fait, il est chevalier dans l’Ordre National du Merite, a cause de son travail comme Avocat en Droit Penal aupres du Consulat General de France a New York.

These charges carry significant potential jail sentences, as well as enormous possible money forfeitures. If it is shown that anyone died as a result of an overdose from one of these illegally distributed pills, then the defendants could easily be facing sentences in excess of ten years or more.

The Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo PLLC has significant experience representing alleged narcotics traffickers in federal court, especially in cases involving opioids and fentanyl. If you or a loved one are a doctor, pharmacist, or other alleged to have participated in an doctor-centered scheme to distribute narcotics, you should strongly consider contacting the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo PLLC. Their lead counsel has had success representing defendants accused of these crimes and has obtained good results.

Crystal methamphetamine is a frequent target of law enforcement in New York. The simple possession of a small (personal use) quantity is typically prosecuted in state court as a misdemeanor pursuant to NY Penal Law Section 220.03. The possession or trafficking of very large quantities of crystal methamphetamine is oftentimes prosecuted in federal court pursuant to 21 U.S.C. Sections 846 and 841, and can carry significant mandatory minimum penalties depending upon the quantity and the defendant’s criminal record. These federal charges also typically involve presumptive pre-trial detention, meaning that it may be difficult if not impossible to secure a defendant’s release pending trial. Larger-scale trafficking and possession of crystal methamphetamine can also result in New York state Class A-II felony charges for Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Second Degree (Penal Law 220.18) and/or Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the Second Degree (Penal Law 220.41).

Matthew Galluzzo has extensive experience defending individuals accused of possessing or trafficking crystal methamphetamine in New York state and federal courts. His clients have gotten great results in these matters. For example, on several occasions, Mr. Galluzzo has negotiated outright dismissals of serious felony charges in exchange for participation in drug rehabilitation programs. In multiple federal cases involving the trafficking of many kilograms of crystal methamphetamine, he earned his clients sentences far below those called for by the Sentencing Guidelines. In short, his track record with these sorts of matters is second to none.

Many individuals arrested for these sorts of offenses have addictions to crystal meth. Mr. Galluzzo has worked with clinicians on many occasions to help his clients beat their addictions and regain their sobriety. He has successfully referred clients to programs like Crystal Clear in Manhattan, for example, a unique group-therapy program for crystal meth addicts run through Mt. Sinai Hospital, and knows the program’s director. A client’s health and safety is always Mr. Galluzzo’s foremost concern, but he finds that clients oftentimes help themselves significantly with respect to their criminal cases when they demonstrate a sincere desire to reform and get sober.

Matthew Galluzzo is also a longtime ally of the LGBT community, and has proudly represented individuals all across the gender and sexual preference spectrum. If you or a loved one have been arrested for a crime involving crystal methamphetamine, you should strongly consider retaining him to assist you.

First, the government has to prove that the defendant actually sold drugs to the deceased person. Law enforcement frequently uses text messages and phone records to prove transactions in these cases. Law enforcement also frequently attempts to purchase narcotics themselves (undercover) from the target/suspect. That way, in the very least, the government can prove a charge of 21 U.S.C. Section 841, if not the overdose aspect.

Many drug overdoses are polydrug situations, meaning that the deceased person ingested more than one drug recently. In those cases, it can be more complicated to ascertain the precise “but for” cause of death. Certain drugs may interact with each other in unclear ways, and other drugs may work together in aggregate towards the same toxidrome. It is critical to have the assistance of a toxicological expert and an attorney familiar with some of the issues in overdose analysis. Many if not most of the federal prosecutions in this sphere nowadays involve fentanyl, and that drug is indeed far more potent, prevalent and deadly than most others. But that doesn’t mean that fentanyl – even when it shows in the victim’s bloodwork – is always the but for cause of death.

Matthew Galluzzo of the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo has successfully represented individuals charged with causing fatal overdoses through drug distribution. Should you or a loved one be charged with such a crime, you should strongly consider retaining his services. These cases are extremely serious and require passionate advocacy and technical expertise. Mr. Galluzzo operates primarily out of New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey federal courts, but also occasionally represents clients in other federal courts across the country.

The indictment charges the following individuals:

LUIS FELICIANO, a.k.a. “Louminaty,” 38, of East Hartford
JOSE TIRADO, a.k.a. “Joselito” and “Leet,” 41, of Hartford
CARL JONES, a.k.a. “M.O.B.,” 41, of Hartford
LUIS ROBLES, a.k.a. “Lou,” 25, of Hartford
ROBERTO DIAZ, a.k.a. “Dragon Eyes,” 52, of West Hartford
MILTON ROSARIO, a.k.a. “Little,” 39, of Hartford
ANGEL DELGADO, 58, of Hartford
MARTIN MALDONADO, 33, of Hartford
JEREMY OZUNA, 27, of New Jersey
ROBERT VALLE, 58, of Schenectady, New York
MARSHA WATSON, 33, of Bangor, Maine
DEVIN TEXIRA, a.k.a. “LV,” 25, of Hartford
JOSHUA RODRIGUEZ, 31, of Hartford
JOEL DELEON, JR., a.k.a. “Psycho,” 41, of Hartford
HERIBERTO MENDEZ, a.k.a. “Big Ed,” 43, of Hartford
CHRISTOPHER GILLIARD, a.k.a. “CJ” and “Gilly,” 34, of Hartford.

They are charged with violations of 21 U.S.C. Section 846 (a conspiracy to distribute narcotics, meaning a working agreement to do a crime together) and violations of 21 U.S.C. Section 841. The seriousness of the latter charge depends on the quantity of the drugs for which the conspirators are responsible (or at least, the amount that was reasonably foreseeable to them as conspirators), with the most serious charge being 21 USC Section 841(a)(1)(A). That latter charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison. Other federal drug charges under Section 841 carry 5 year mandatory minimum sentences, and others have no mandatory minimum at all (though there could be a twenty-year maximum).

Several of the defendants are also charged with various firearms offenses. The 922g charge in this indictment means possession of a firearm by a “prohibited person,” which in this case means a person with a prior felony conviction. The 924c charge relates to the possession or use of a firearm in furtherance of a narcotics-related crime. So, just having access to the gun while operating as a drug dealer can be sufficient evidence of guilt for this crime. It could carry a potential five-year sentence to run consecutive to any narcotics-related sentence.

Notably, the press release explains that this case involves a significant quantity of fentanyl. That drug is oftentimes used to lace other drugs, make counterfeit pills (fake Xanax or Oxycodone), and all-too-often causes fatal overdoses. As such, the penalties for fentanyl can be significant, and individuals convicted of trafficking fentanyl may not be eligible for certain credits for early release from prison.

If you or a loved one have been charged with violating the federal narcotics or firearm laws, you should strongly consider contacting Matthew Galluzzo. He is a federal criminal defense attorney based in New York and Connecticut and former Manhattan prosecutor.

According to a press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, the rapper and five other men trafficked in significant quantities of heroin, cocaine, and the especially-dangerous drug, fentanyl. The defendants (including Anthony Leonardi, Robert Leonardi, Brian Sullivan, Anthony Syntje, and Kavaughn Wiggins) have all been arrested and detained pending trial. Prosecutors claim to have recovered at least 16 kilograms of cocaine, 2 kilograms of heroin, and fentanyl, though it is certain that they will allege that the group is responsible for far more than that. Indeed, the press release describes the amount of drugs trafficked by the crew as “massive”.

Fetty Wap is unlikely to be released on bail pending trial, though it may be possible given his likely financial resources. However, in federal narcotics cases of this size and scale, the presumption for judges is that a defendant should be detained pending trial. Fetty Wap would have to convincingly demonstrate that he does not pose a risk to the public, and that he would not flee if released on bond. Given his resources (and possible ability to live abroad), the amount of prison time that he is potentially facing, the fact that his codefendants are indicted for using firearms, and the fact that he allegedly trafficked in fentanyl, which is notorious for causing fatal overdoses, it seems unlikely that he will be bailed out pending trial.

The maximum penalty for these charges (21 U.S.C. 841) is, in this case, life. The minimum statutory penalty is ten years in prison. In some cases, defendants facing ten year mandatory minimum sentences under 21 USC 841 are able to negotiate five year mandatory minimum sentences, or even plea agreements without mandatory minimums. However, given the amount of narcotics seized in this case, Fetty Wap is probably going to receive no better than a ten year mandatory minimum offer from the prosecutors, which he will either have to accept or try his luck with a jury.

The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines generally enable more precise estimates for how much time defendants are really facing, however. It is difficult to predict at this stage, though, as there are some unknown variables in Fetty Wap’s case. We do not know, for example, whether there are any overdoses potentially attributable to the defendants’ conduct. We also do not know whether Fetty Wap played a supervisory role in the conspiracy to traffic narcotics. Those factors can significantly increase the penalties for drug defendants. Pleading guilty, on the other hand, usually earns significant reductions in the sentencing range for defendants (as opposed to being convicted at trial).

Fetty Wap is of course presumed innocent. As of yet, we have no idea what evidence law enforcement has against him. But odds are that his outlook is very bleak. Federal indictments in cases like this tend to involve numerous controlled undercover purchases, wiretaps, surveillance, and confidential informants working with the government. Put another way, the evidence is typically overwhelming. It is thus no surprise that over 95% of federal criminal defendants plead guilty. So, Fetty Wap is unfortunately probably looking at a huge sentence that will end his music career and see him emerge from prison as an old man. It seems inexplicable that a talented artist with a lucrative career would risk everything to make illegal money in the drug trade. His lawyers will probably be seeking to get him the best plea bargain possible, and then beg a sentencing judge for leniency. That is oftentimes the best that defense attorneys can really do in these sorts of cases. But top notch advocacy for a client is truly invaluable and can make a huge difference in the outcome.

Matthew Galluzzo is a former Manhattan prosecutor who regularly represents criminal defendants charged with major narcotics crimes in federal and state courts throughout New York. He has helped many defendants escape prosecution, earn dismissals of criminal charges, and negotiate favorable plea bargain outcomes. If you or a loved one have been arrested and charged with a serious drug felony, you should contact Matthew Galluzzo to discuss your options.

In these cases, federal law generally requires the agents to send a notice to the person from whom the cash was seized. The person who receives the notice is typically given the opportunity to make a claim for the cash, which includes an explanation as to the source of the cash. This response must be made under penalty of perjury, and can include supplemental documentation from a related business (such as tax returns or bank statements), or sworn statements from other people, among other things. Every once in awhile, the agents return the cash to the claimant based upon the representations made by the claimant, or based upon the evidence demonstrated to the agency. Our attorneys have successfully assisted clients in getting cash returned by federal agents this way.

If, however, the agency refuses to return the money based upon these representations, then they must commence a civil forfeiture action in federal court. The precise procedures for doing so are outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 983. Ultimately, in a civil court proceeding, the federal agency (DEA) must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the seized cash represents proceeds of illegal activity. This is the civil standard for proof and it is much lower (easier) than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard necessary to prove a person’s guilt of a crime.

Of course, the DEA may also elect to arrest the claimant as a co-conspirator to narcotics trafficking or money laundering. In that case, the DEA and federal prosecutor (U.S. Attorney) can add a forfeiture count to the indictment, and a civil forfeiture proceeding no longer becomes necessary.

The person considering whether to respond to this initial seizure notice has many things to consider. First, the response has to be made under oath. Thus, a false statement relating to the seized cash is punishable as a federal crime pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Second, the claimant should carefully consider the circumstances under which the cash was seized. They should ask themselves: how did the DEA agents know that there was cash to be seized? Did they simply stumble upon it, or has there been a long-term investigation with wiretaps, cooperating witnesses, and/or surveillance that led them to make this cash seizure? The latter is normally more likely. Of course, it could be suspicious for a claimant to let DEA agents seize a huge quantity of cash without any protestations – after all, if, say, one million dollars in cash were lawfully obtained, wouldn’t the owner want it back?

Ultimately, the top priority for someone whose cash has been seized by the DEA should be avoiding an arrest or an indictment by federal authorities. Thus, any response to a seizure notice should be made after careful discussion with a knowledgeable criminal defense attorney. Matthew Galluzzo, an experienced criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor, has assisted many clients in these sorts of matters and is prepared to assist you or a loved one as well.

Federal cases involving narcotics charges typically are the result of long-term investigations by the FBI, the DEA, Homeland Security, or a joint task force involving local police like the NYPD. As such, there are oftentimes wiretaps, surveillance tapes, confidential informants, and search warrants. An effective defense requires an attorney who can review the evidence and the law enforcement processes to determine whether any constitutional rights were violated.

Many unfortunate individuals never actually possessed or distributed narcotics but nonetheless find themselves charged in federal court on account of the conspiracy laws encapsulated in 21 USC 846. That statute explains: “Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this subchapter shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.” Basically, this means that a person who plays any knowing role whatsoever in another person’s illegal business is criminally liable for the entirety of that conduct. For example, a person who introduces two people for the purpose of a drug transaction can be expected to be charged as an equal to whatever drug transaction ultimately occurred. A person who acts as a lookout during a drug transaction could be treated as equally culpable to the seller of the narcotics. A person who simply rents an apartment to someone whom he knows is dealing drugs from the apartment could be guilty of “conspiring” to assist the dealer. These are just a few examples of people who could be charged in ways that seem unfair in light of their relatively modest role in the crime. We have however defended many girlfriends of drug dealers and casual acquaintances of true criminals who have found themselves knee-deep in serious federal cases after having had only fleeting or tangential involvement in the cases. But this is the reality of federal conspiracy law.

In conclusion, if you or a loved one have been arrested and charged with violating the federal criminal drug laws – such as 21 USC 841 or 21 USC 846 – you should strongly consider retaining the services of the experienced criminal defense attorneys at the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo. Their team of former Manhattan prosecutors has successfully defended numerous individuals accused of federal crimes relating to the possession and trafficking of cocaine, heroin, crystal meth and methamphetamine, GHB (gamma hydroxybutyric acid), ecstasy (MDMA), fentanyl, and prescription drugs like oxycontin, oxycodone, and other opiods. Notably, their attorneys have particular experience and expertise in defending foreign citizens in these matters, as they are fluent in French and Spanish and have long relationships with the New York-area consulates of several foreign nations (including France, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia and Australia, among others). They also have experience defending individuals accused of operating illegally on the Dark Web. Their results involve numerous dismissals and favorable sentences far below those normally called for by the federal sentencing guidelines. Give them a call to discuss your federal New York district court case. They operate primarily in the Southern District of New York and Eastern District of New York federal courts.

In many ways, a Desk Appearance Ticket does not feel like such a big deal. The arrested person is usually handcuffed and taken to a police station where they are fingerprinted. They typically wait a few hours in a holding cell until they are given a piece of paper telling them the date and location of their appearance in court. Before Desk Appearance Tickets became routine, criminal defendants could expect to get “sent downtown” and spend the night in jail before seeing a judge. Obviously, Desk Appearance Tickets are preferable for criminal defendants because they spend less time in custody and also have the opportunity to choose counsel for themselves prior to going to court.

Make no mistake, however: the issuance of a Desk Appearance Ticket is in fact an arrest – it is not “just a ticket”. More importantly for visa holders, this event is not going to “fly under the radar” with the immigration agencies. If you were arrested and given a Desk Appearance Ticket, your fingerprints and the arrest charges have been sent to a New York state agency (the Division of Criminal Justice Services) and to the FBI, which maintains a federal nationwide law enforcement database of all arrest events across the United States (the Interstate Identification Index). Visa and green card holders should understand that the immigration agencies, in processing visa renewal requests, access this database to investigate whether the visa applicant has an arrest record. Indeed, some visa holders actually receive emails from Department of Homeland Security (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) agents after their arrests, because the agency was notified of the arrest via the fingerprint database.

Generally speaking, visas will not be renewed if a visa holder has a pending (meaning unresolved) criminal case. Our office has worked with many people whose visas to work or attend school in the U.S. were denied on account of having a pending criminal case, either forcing them to return to their native country or preventing them from returning to the United States. Of course, certain types of convictions can also prevent the renewal of a visa, and can even result in removal or deportation for green card holders. The rules pertaining to the effects of various convictions are too complicated to full explain here – you should consult with an experienced attorney on the subject.

If you received a Desk Appearance Ticket, it should tell you what you can expect to be charged with when you go to court. Specifically, it will list a “Penal Law” charge with the phrase “PL” followed by a number next to the term “Top Offense Charge” or “Top Count”. The most common types of Desk Appearance Tickets include charges of Petit Larceny (or shoplifting, PL 155.25), Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Seventh Degree (PL 220.03), Theft of Services (PL 165.15), Criminal Possession of a Weapon (PL 265.01), Assault in the Third Degree (PL 120.00), Trespass (PL 140.10), Public Lewdness (PL 245.00), Forgery (PL 170.20), Unlawful Possession of Marijuana (PL 221.10), and Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree (PL 130.53). These charges are all misdemeanors punishable by up to 90 days or 1 year in jail.

Most individuals (without prior arrests) charged with these crimes do not incur criminal convictions. However, many of the “best” dispositions for these cases – called Adjournments in Contemplation of Dismissals (or “ACDs”) – involve long “probationary” periods of six months or a year, during which time the defendants agree to remain arrest free and complete community service or counseling in exchange for a dismissal of the charges. Dismissals are generally great for defendants, so it is hard to refuse such an offer from the prosecutor and court, normally. Unfortunately for visa holders, these “probationary periods” sometimes overlap with the deadlines for renewals of their visas, and since the criminal charges are technically still pending during these probationary periods, visas can and will be denied during these periods. There are a number of possible solutions to this problem. Oftentimes, we seek to have court dates advanced for our clients to avoid deadline problems, meaning that the cases are brought to court sooner than originally scheduled. Sometimes we are able to convince prosecutors to dismiss charges outright. Other times, we simply petition prosecutors to shorten the “probationary periods” on the ACDs to give our clients the opportunity to apply for their visas without this impediment for renewal.

Criminal defendants holding visas and facing Desk Appearance Tickets should also consult with an attorney prior to traveling abroad. New executive orders signed by the President have complicated foreign travel for such individuals. Indeed, foreign visa holders could risk being denied re-entry into the United States by traveling while a criminal case is pending.

Our attorneys regularly represent foreign citizens charged with Desk Appearance Tickets. In fact, on account of our close relationships with several foreign consulates in New York City, over half of our criminal defense clients are citizens of foreign nations. As a result, we understand the unique challenges that holders of green cards of visas face after receiving a Desk Appearance Ticket, and we understand how to best help our clients avoid serious consequences for their visas or immigration status. We have helped countless individuals with F1, K1, H1B, J1, O1, E3, H2B, B1, and other visas remain in the United States so that they could pursue their careers and educational opportunities, and we are proud to have been able to do so.

If you or a loved one are a foreign citizen and have received a Desk Appearance Ticket, you should seriously consider the experienced criminal defense attorneys at the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo. Their team of former Manhattan prosecutors will help you navigate the confusing criminal-immigration system and work with your immigration attorneys to do everything possible to ensure that your application for a renewal of your visa or green card is unaffected by these criminal charges.

If you or a loved one are wrongfully accused of any offense, contact the experienced attorneys at The Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo – they have a proven track record of success and will fight just as agressively for you.

American demand for illegal drugs, combined with harsh federal and state laws prohibiting their sale and possession, has created a black market that can be extraordinarily lucrative for illegal drug traffickers. Enticed by the potential to make significant amounts of money very quickly, many foreign citizens make the mistake of attempting to import controlled substances into the United States through New York City’s international airports (JFK and Newark, and to a lesser extent, LaGuardia). Those individuals caught in the act of importing narcotics typically face federal criminal charges like 21 U.S.C. § 952 (importing controlled substances) or 21 U.S.C. § 841 (possessing controlled substances with intent to distribute). Indeed, one study concluded that approximately 75% of those individuals sentenced for federal drug convictions in 2014 were illegal immigrants or foreign citizens.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/illegal-immigrants-responsible-for-almost-three-fourths-of-federal-drug-possession-sentences-in-2014/article/2567814

It should first be noted that individuals basically do not have any constitutional protections against searches or seizures at the U.S. border. This is a slight oversimplification, but plainly put, Customs officers at the airports are generally permitted to search any luggage for just about any reason, whether that person is a citizen or not. Customs officials can also search through electronic devices and cell phones without any articulable suspicion (which occasionally results in arrests for child pornography).

Individuals found to have illegal controlled substances in their luggage or on their persons at the airport tend to be charged with federal crimes, though small matters are sometimes referred to state law enforcement (where the penalties tend to be less severe). It is the transportation of the controlled substances across state lines or across the U.S. border that gives federal law enforcement jurisdiction to prosecute these cases.

Foreign citizens arrested for illegally importing controlled substances are typically brought before a federal magistrate judge for an initial appearance a day or two after their arrests. At that time, the judge determines the amount of bail to set. Bail in these cases tends to be very high, if it is set at all (the alternative to bail is a remand, in which the accused individuals are simply detained and not afforded the opportunity to post bail at all). Additionally, though, the immigration agencies usually serve immigration detainers, which are agency orders that cause any accused foreign citizen to be taken directly into immigration custody in the event that he or she actually pays her federal criminal bail. Put another way, most foreign citizens accused of federal drug importation crimes should not even bother trying to post bail, as the payment of bail would simply result in them being transferred into an immigration jail, where they would wait until the resolution of their criminal case anyway.

The penalties for individuals charged with federal drug importation crimes at the airport depend primarily upon the quantities of drugs that the accused individuals were attempting to import. This issue is too difficult to summarize here – you should contact an experienced criminal defense attorney to discuss the likely potential sentence under the federal Sentencing Guidelines.

Even those individuals with green cards or valid American visas can face deportation as a result of merely being arrested – let alone convicted – for alleged importation of narcotics at the American border. Thus, the stakes can be particularly high for those accused non-citizens with family members living in the United States.

Some non-citizens also find themselves getting in trouble for possessing drugs or controlled substances that they had no intention of trafficking. For example, we have represented several individuals that have been stopped while attempting to bring prescription drugs onto airplanes departing the United States. These individuals typically get charged in state court with misdemeanors in violation of Penal Law 220.03. Foreigners should understand that even if they have valid foreign prescriptions for their controlled substances, if they cannot present proof of those prescriptions to inspectors at the airport, they are likely to be arrested. In short, prescription drugs should never be carried “loose” in airline luggage or without proof of the underlying prescription. Non-citizens convicted of even misdemeanor state level drug charges can also face serious immigration consequences from these seemingly minor incidents.

If your loved one is a foreign citizen facing drug charges in the United States, you should strongly consider contacting the experienced criminal defense attorneys at The Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo. Their team of former prosecutors has successfully defended countless individuals charged with drug possession and trafficking, and has represented a citizen of almost every sizable nation on Earth. Indeed, a significant percentage of their clients are foreign citizens, as they maintain close working relationships with the New York area consulates of several foreign nations, including France, Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Belgium, and Australia. Call them to schedule a consultation and get a fair assessment of your case.

On parle français. Se habla español.

Result: All charges dismissed entirely after attorney Eric Arnone successfully demonstrated defendant’s innocence to the New York County District Attorney’s Office.

If you or a loved one have been charged with a serious controlled substance felony, you should strongly consider contacting the experiened criminal defense attorneys at the Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo. Their team of former prosecutors includes Eric Arnone, the primary attorney on this matter that achieved this outstanding result for an MG client.

The New York Post today reported that on February 5, federal agents and the NYPD arrested approximately 24 people in connection with indictments for conspiring to traffic illegal prescription drugs. Specifically, it is alleged that numerous doctors – at least some associated with the Astramed physicians’ clinic in the Bronx – wrote prescriptions for Oxycodone for people that they knew did not need them or intend to use them, and that these individuals then filled these prescriptions and gave the pills to traffickers for resale. All in all, it is alleged by the prosecutors that over a half billion dollars worth of illegal Oxycodone was purchased and trafficked into the black market in this fashion.

It may be that many of the individuals involved in this operation were in legitimate need of prescription medication and in fact committed no crimes, and it remains to be seen whether the doctors that wrote the prescriptions actually knew that they were furthering a criminal enterprise instead of simply writing prescriptions that they believed were medically necessary. Interestingly, under federal conspiracy laws, the individuals that obtained the phony prescriptions from the purportedly corrupt doctors could be charged with the same crimes as the doctors that knowingly wrote the false prescriptions or the drug dealers that ultimately resold the illegal pills, though they are likely to be able to receive shorter jail sentences for having played smaller roles in the operation.

Oxycodone is a Schedule II controlled substance under the United States Controlled Substance Act. We suspect that the applicable charge contained in the federal indictment is a violation of 22 USC 841(a), with penalties described under 22 USC 841(b)(1)(C). Notably, it appears that at least one or two individuals have also been charged in New York State Supreme court with similar state-level charges.

If you or a loved one have been arrested in connection with this criminal investigation, you should strongly consider contacting the experienced criminal defense attorneys at The Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo. They have siginificant experience successfully defending individuals in large-scale conspiracy cases and in prescription drug conspiracy cases.

For more on the “Kingpin” statute, or Operating as a Major Trafficker (Penal Law Section 220.77), click here.

A person is guilty of Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the First Degree when he or she knowingly and unlawfully possesses:

1) one or more preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances containing a narcotic drug (which includes cocaine or heroin, for example) and said preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances are of an aggregate weight of eight ounces or more; or

2) methadone and said methadone weighs five thousand seven hundred sixty milligrams or more.

(An ounces to grams converter is available here).

Sometimes, in First Degree possession cases, multiple individuals are charged with the same crime at the same time for possessing the same large quantity of narcotics. Typically, the prosecutor will use one of the statutory presumptions available to him under Penal Law Section 220.25 – such as the “automobile presumption” (subsection 1) or the“room presumption” (subsection 2). However, both of these presumptions are rebuttable, and a skilled defense attorneycan refute them with evidence and arguments that the accused was unaware of the presence of the narcotics in the automobile he was riding in or the room he was sitting in.

A person is guilty of Criminal Sale of a Controlled Substance in the First Degree when he knowingly and unlawfully sells:

1) one or more preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances containing a narcotic drug and the preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances are of an aggregate weight of two ounces or more; or

2) methadone and the methadone weighs two thousand eight hundred eighty milligrams or more.

As you can see, the minimum quantities for the sale charges are smaller than the minimum quantities for the first-degree possession charges.

In our experience, an arrest for a First Degree sale usually suggests a long-term investigation by undercover narcotics officers. In those cases, an undercover officer has probably made multiple purchases from an accused (in order to gain his trust) before attempting to purchase a large enough quantity to qualify for an A-1 charge. We find, however, that sometimes people are arrested and accused for these crimes even when they played a small or non-existent role in the sale(s). These individuals can have very defensible cases. A skilled defense attorney can also challenge the credibility of the confidential informant or undercover officer through a variety of other cross-examination techniques, as well.

In a nutshell, these cases carry very stiff penalties but can be defeated with the assistance of a defense attorney that understands how to win them. If you or a loved one have been arrested for one of these crimes, then you should strongly consider hiring the experienced criminal defense attorneys at The Law Office of Matthew Galluzzo. Their team of three former senior Manhattan prosecutors understands how these sorts of cases are constructed by the police, and thus, they have unique insight into how best to defend against them. Give them a call to schedule an appointment today: (212) 344-5180.