cocaine

Published on: July 26, 2023

Desk Appearance Ticket at NYC Airports

New York City is one of the best cities in the world to visit and it attracts tourists from all over the world. Unfortunately, a few of them are arrested every day at the New York City airports: LaGuardia and JFK (John F. Kennedy). Most of them receive Desk Appearance Tickets for misdemeanor offenses. These arrests typically involve generally law-abiding citizens accidentally carrying something in their luggage that is illegal in New York, such as a weapon (Penal Law Section 265.01) or a controlled substance (Penal Law Section 220.03). Sometimes, Port Authority Police also make arrests and give Desk Appearance Tickets for offenses at the airport like trespassing (Penal Law 140.10), shoplifting (Penal Law 155.25 or 165.40), public lewdness (Penal Law Section 245.00) or assault (Penal Law Section 120.00). These tickets typically direct the arrest person to appear in court about a month later at the Queens Criminal Courthouse located at 125-01 Queens Boulevard in Kew Gardens, New York.

Although the offenses may seem minor at first, these cases in fact present very real risks to the arrested persons: possible permanent and public criminal records, immigration consequences, prison time, loss of employment, and financial penalties, among others. For out-of-town tourists, they present an additional problem, though: appearing in court personally can be logistically very difficult, especially if the case involves multiple appearances. Traveling across the country (or across an ocean) means potentially missing time from work, school and/or family obligations, not to mention the expense of traveling.

Matthew Galluzzo has perfected a system of client affidavits that often permits him to appear – in certain cases – on behalf of out-of-town or foreign clients. Using these affidavits, he has frequently been able to appear without his clients and resolve cases favorably for those clients. He has helped dozens of New York visitors resolve misdemeanor cases without appearing personally in New York City for their court appearances. Not every case can be resolved this way, but many can.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 6, 2022

Federal narcotics importation charges – 21 USC 952 and 960.

By Matthew J. Galluzzo

Most defendants charged with narcotics trafficking in federal court are charged with violations of 21 U.S.C. Section 841 and 846. The potential penalties for those offenses generally depend upon the type of narcotic at issue, the quantity trafficked, and whether anyone died as a result of consuming 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.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 21, 2022

Defending against Federal Drug Overdose Cases – 21 USC 841

By Matthew J. Galluzzo

Federal prosecutors sometimes have a powerful statute to use against drug sellers whose products cause fatal overdoses. Specifically, 21 U.S.C. Section 841 – the most common federal narcotics distribution charge – includes enhanced penalties for situations in which the defendants have sold or distributed narcotics that caused overdose deaths. A charge with no mandatory minimum under normal circumstances might carry a 20-year minimum where it can be proven that the drug that was sold caused someone to die. Some prior felons can also face potential mandatory life sentences for selling narcotics that cause fatalities. Even in a case in which the prosecution may not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the narcotics caused a death, the prosecution may be able to secure a very stiff sentence under the federal Sentencing Guidelines, where the evidence proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant’s product is responsible.

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.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 23, 2018

Federal drug/narcotics conspiracy charges (21 USC 841 and 21 USC 846)

By Matthew J. Galluzzo

A huge percentage of the criminal cases in federal court involve charges relating to the trafficking of drugs, narcotics, and controlled substances. Convictions for these crimes carry serious penalties and sometimes involve mandatory minimum prison sentences. Usually, a person accused in federal court of possessing or trafficking controlled substances is charged with violating 21 USC 841, which makes it a crime to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled substance. Section 841(b) sets forth the potential penalties for this offense, and it depends primarily upon the quantity of controlled substance possessed/distributed in the aggregate. What matters for sentencing purposes is not the number of transactions or the frequency of the activity, but the total volume of drugs possessed or distributed over time. If the quantities involved surpass a certain threshold (depending on the drug), as set forth in Section 841(b), then there can be serious mandatory minimum prison sentences for the offenders. Those mandatory minimum sentences notwithstanding, the potential penalties for these offenses are governed by the complex system set forth in the federal sentencing guidelines. For more on the federal sentencing guidelines, click here.

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.

Continue reading →