NEW YORK POLICE BRUTALITY, POLICE MISCONDUCT AND UNJUST CONVICTION ATTORNEYS
If you were Falsely Arrested, Maliciously Prosecuted,
or were Beaten By the Police, or Were Unjustly Convicted
Our Police Misconduct Lawyers Can Help
Our New York City police misconduct lawyers are highly experienced trial attorneys who regularly handle police brutality and police misconduct cases in New York City, including Manhattan, the Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn and Westchester County, including White Plains, Yonkers, Rye, Mount Kisco and Rockland County.
As an experienced New York criminal defense lawyer and civil rights lawyer, Michael Joseph has successfully defended criminal cases in which the accused was the victim of false arrest and malicious prosecution in New York City and Westchester. Our New York police misconduct lawyers experienced in handling these types of cases where the police use excessive force and assaulted civilians and then fabricate evidence to justify the use of force and assault.
Police in New York and Westchester will often charge people with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and obstructing governmental administration to justify a baseless arrest and use of force. Our New York and Westchester police misconduct lawyers know how to look closely at the details to expose what really happened.
Both Federal and New York State Law gives citizens the right to sue the police and government employees for violations of their civil rights and liberties. Police brutality and police misconduct are serious offenses which should not be ignored. Our New York City police misconduct attorneys have recovered substantial compensation for people who were falsely arrested, maliciously prosecuted, falsely imprisoned and subjected to excessive force by the police.
HIGHLY EXPERIENCED CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYERS IF YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED- CALL US FOR A FREE CONSULTATION
If you were harmed because of the improper actions of government officials, the law allows you to seek compensation for what happened to you. Our New York civil rights attorneys are committed to make sure that those who abuse their power are held accountable and that vicitms of police or other governmental misconduct are properly compensated. A few of the areas which our New York civil right lawyers have experience are as follows.
POLICE BRUTALITY AND EXCESSIVE FORCE
Our New York City police brutality attorneys have handled numerous cases of excessive force in New York City and Westchester, Every citizen has the right under the United States Constitution to not be beaten or subjected to excessive force by police officers during an arrest.
Generally, police officer must use only the amount of force which is reasonable to subdue a suspect. Often in the arrest context, police officers in New York, will use more force than necessary or use force when none is necessary. If the person being arrested is not resisting, then the officer is not entitled to use any force.
Our New York City and Westchester police brutality lawyers are aggressive in finding witnesses, documenting injuries and mechanisms of injury to expose the lies. Our attorneys are aggressive in securing video evidence to demonstrate what really happened. While most jurors are inclined to believe police officer, where there is video evidence that show they are lying, our police misconduct attorneys make every effort to get the video evidence.Our New York police brutality lawyers have handled numerous cases of unjustified use of mace, pepper spray and beating a suspect who was handcuffed.
PRISONERS ASSAULTED BY OTHER PRISONERS
Counties, such as Westcheter County and New York City can be can be sued when they don’t provide adequate safety in a County or City jail. New York Courts recognize that prison officials are responsible to protect prisoners from violence and assaults by other prisoners. Under these laws, correction officers who permit or turn a blind eye to beatings and even prison rape to occur can be sued.
Under New York state law, prison officers can also be held liable for failing to protect prisoners from dangerous inmates. Deliberate indifference and negligence can be proven where corrections officers ignore threats to an inmate, fail to properly classify inmates and separate gang members.
Often, prison time is incorrectly calculated or due to ministerial or clerical errors, inmates are released from prison late. When this happens, a lawsuit for wrongful incarceration can be brought. Common scenarios for Wrongful Incarceration occur when a jail holds an inmate beyond their release date or when a person not released when a Judge orders their release. Our New York Wrongful Incarceration attorneys have handled numberous wrongful incarceration cases both in New York City and Westchester.
NEW YORK MALICIOUS PROSECUTION LAWYERS OUR ATTORNEYS ARE THE LEADERS IN THE FIELD
Our New York malicious prosecution attorneys are among some of the most experienced civil rights attorneys in New York State and Westchester County. Our lawyers have handed several high profile malicious prosecution cases for exonerees, doctors, professionals and even police officers who were maliciously prosecuted. Our New York malicious prosecution attorneys have been active in the State and Federal Courts in moving the law forward in a positive decision. We have successfully argued before the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals and expanded the law to recognize different circumstances under which a malicious prosecution claim can be presented.
New York State recognizes a cause of action for malicious prosecution and under Federal Law, 42 U.S.C. 1983, a person who has been maliciously prosecuted for being deprived of their civil liberties, including the right not to be subjected to a malicious prosecution. To win a malicious prosecution case, the Plaintiff has to prove that the defendant, usually a police officer or detective, initiated a prosecution or continued a prosecution when they knew it was baseless, that there was a lack of probable cause to believe that the prosecution could succeed, that the prosecution terminated in your favor and that there was malice.
LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE
In order to prove a malicious prosecution case you have to prove there was a lack of probable cause. To prove there was no probable cause, a Plaintiff has to show that the evidence which the police asserted established probable cause was fabricated or that they withheld information that was favorable and vitiated probable cause. Where there is a civilian complaining witness or confidential informant, you have to show the police knew the witness was not credible. Our New York malicious prosecution attorneys are meticulous in analyzing evidence that was used in a prosecution and proving that probable cause was lacking.
While our attorneys disagree with the current state of the law, in New York, not every termination of a criminal case which most people would think of as favorable, is favorable for malicious prosecution cases. The terminations, which a lawsuit can be based upon include a not guilty verdict, a speedy trial violation, a dismissal on the merits, a conviction that was vacated or reversed on appeal, on the merits. Some terminations, which are not favorable under New York's malicious prosecution caselaw include adjournments in contemplation of dismissal and facial insufficiency dismissals.
THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE
Sometimes, You Can Sue For Due Process Violations Even If You Cannot
Sue For Malicious Prosecution
The Due Process clause allows people to sue if their rights to Due Process were violated. In this context, the Courts have recognized that if the police fabricate evidence, or withhold or suppress evidence that is favorable to some one who is accused of a crime, that is sufficient to establish a violation of the Due Process Clause. The Due Process clause does not have a favorable termination requirement, so you can sue under the Due Process Clause even if you received a dismissal based upon facial sufficiency or some other dismissal that does not qualify for a malicous prosecution case. But obviously, if you were convicted you cannot sue, unless the conviction was overturned or vacated.
UNREASONABLE DELAY - WITHHOLDING OF FAVORABLE INFORMATION
The Due Process clause allows a person who was incarcerated while waiting for trial, to sue, if the police were in possession of evidence that showed the accused was actually innocent. This is often referred to as a Russo Claim. The most common example of a Russo Claim or a Due Process claim based upon prolonged detention occurs when the police have video evidence or forensic evidence which shows that someone else committed the crime, and exonerates the accused.
UNJUST CONVICTION- THE COURT OF CLAIMS 8B CLAIM No Amount of Money Can Undo the Harm Caused By The Incarceration of An Innocent Person
If your conviction was vacated or reversed and you served prison time, even though you were actually innocent of the crime for which you were prosecuted, then you may be entitled to compensation. New York has set up a compensation program under section 8B of the Court of Claims Act, in which the State will compensate innocent people who were wrongfully incarcerated or imprisoned, if their conviction was vacated. Our New York attorneys who represent exonerees know the damage that being wrongfully incarcerated does to a person's life. You can seek compensation for wrongful incarceration in the New York Court of Claims and sue those responsible in the New York State and Federal Courts for malicious prosecution at the same time. If you spent time in jail for a crime that you did not commit and were exonerated, call our New York wrongful incarceration attorneys.
These claims have strict deadlines and require that a Notice of Intention to File a Claim be filed with the Attorney General's office within 90 days of the person's release from incarceration, then a claim must be filed within two years of the release. If you have an 8b claim, do not wait until the last minute, because the claim requires that you submit evidentiary evidence with your claim, which can take a significant amount of time to properly prepare.
A Claimant seeking compensation for an unjust conviction under Section 8-b of the Court of Claims Act (“Section 8-b”) must prove by “clear and convincing” evidence that: (a) he or she was convicted of a felony, sentenced to a term of
imprisonment, and has served all or part of that sentence; (b) that his or her conviction was reversed or vacated on a ground set forth in CPL 440.10 or 470.20; (c) he or she did not commit the acts charged in the accusatory instrument; and (d) he or she did not, by his own conduct, cause or bring about his conviction.
In order to present the claim for unjust conviction and imprisonment, claimant must establish by documentary evidence that (i) he has been pardoned upon the ground of innocence of the crime or crimes for which he was sentenced and which are the grounds for the complaint; or (ii) his judgment of conviction was reversed or vacated, and the accusatory instrument dismissed or, if a new trial was ordered, either he was found not guilty at the new trial or he was not retried and the accusatory instrument dismissed; provided that the judgement of conviction was reversed or vacated, and the accusatory instrument was dismissed
The pleading requirements are stringent in a claim for unjust conviction. The claim must state facts in sufficient detail to permit the court to find that claimant is likely to succeed at trial in proving that (a) he did not commit any of the acts charged in the accusatory instrument or his acts or omissions charged in the accusatory instrument did not constitute a felony or misdemeanor against the state, and (b) he did not by his own conduct cause or bring about his conviction. The claim shall be verified by the claimant. If the court finds after reading the claim that claimant is not likely to succeed at trial, it shall dismiss the claim, either on its own motion or on the motion of the state. This means that even cases with merit can be dismissed if they are not drafted correctly. So if you have an unjust conviction claim, consult with our New York unjust conviction lawyers so your case gets presented correctly.