Attorney Russ Kofman's Legal Cases

Criminal defense

People v. B.U.

Mar 30, 2017

OUTCOME: case dismissed

Our client was charged in King County Criminal Court, part DV2, for misdemeanor charges including Assault in the Third Degree (P.L. 120.00(1)), Petit Larceny (P.L. 155.25), Criminal Possession of Stole ... n Property (P.L. 165.40), Attempted Assault in the Third Degree (P.L. 110/120.00(1)), and Menacing in the Third Degree (P.L. 120.15). Our client was a licensed professional clinician and had never been arrested before this. On the top count, our client was facing a criminal conviction for the rest of her life and up to one year in jail. Such a conviction would cause her to lose her job and prevent her from future opportunities. The prosecution claimed that our client, who was living with the complaining witness, her boyfriend at the time, threw out his belongings. They claimed that as the complaining witness tried to get back inside, she slammed the door, causing it to strike him in the face. They claimed she took his phone out of his pocket and bit him on his wrist. The complaining witness allegedly suffered lacerations and bruising and was treated at a local hospital. Our client vehemently denied the accusations and refused to take any offer, even one that would leave her without a criminal record. She stated that when the police arrived, she tried to tell them her side of the story, but they wouldn’t listen to her and just arrested her. We urged the prosecution to investigate the complainant’s allegations further and find surveillance of the incident. When they failed to obtain the surveillance, we brought it to the court’s attention. Just when the case was nearing trial, the district attorney’s office dismissed all the charges against our client, with all records of the arrest permanently sealed from her record.

Criminal defense

People v. J.K.

Mar 22, 2017

OUTCOME: ACD

Our client was charged in Manhattan Criminal Court, part A, for misdemeanor charges including Attempted Assault in the Third Degree, Penal Law 120.00(1). This charge is a class B misdemeanor and, if co ... nvicted, he would face up to 90 days in jail and a permanent conviction on his record. The prosecution claimed that our client got into an altercation with a male victim on the street and tried to swing at him in an attempt to punch him. The prosecution claimed that our client grabbed the alleged male victim and caused him to fall on the ground. They claimed that when he fell, his cellular phone broke. They claimed that an off duty law enforcement officer observed this incident and notified authorities, resulting in his arrest. Our client vehemently denied these allegations, asserting that it was the alleged victim who, while intoxicated, started an altercation with him and charged him on the street. Our client was a successful businessperson and in the process of vital background checks which would determine the course of his career during that time, so any open cases, violations, or convictions would have a severely negative effect. Under our time constraints, we had to work with the prosecutor to explain our side of the story and the urgency of resolving the case as soon as possible. After much effort, and after only a few weeks and ONE court date, we obtained an immediate dismissal and sealing after he completed one day of community service and paid restitution for the cellular phone. All records of this arrest were permanently sealed from his record, keeping his record free of any arrest or conviction history.

Criminal defense

People v. T.R.

Jan 01, 2016

OUTCOME: ACD

Our client was charged in Manhattan Criminal Court, part B, for: two counts of Assault in the Third Degree, Penal Law sections 120.00(1) and 120.00(2), and Harassment in the Second Degree, Penal Law se ... ction 240.26(1). Our client was accused of punching a bouncer at a nightclub in the face. The prosecution claimed that our client, who was in New York City for an internship position for the summer, was arguing with the bouncer at the club to get back inside, and that he punched the bouncer in the face in front of witnesses. 911 was called and our client was arrested and charged, facing multiple misdemeanors and potential jail time. Our client was only 21 years old, active in his community, and an honors college student with a bright future. Because of an unfortunate incident in a city he was unfamiliar with, he was now facing a criminal conviction and jail time, which would prevent him from pursuing his career goals. Our client vehemently denied punching the bouncer, telling us that it was the bouncer who in fact hit him. We pointed out to the prosecution that these so-called “witnesses” probably all knew the bouncer and would therefore most likely side with him regardless of who was at fault, and that the bouncer was much larger than our client in size, making his claim that much more unreasonable. At first, the prosecution offered a violation, which, although not a criminal conviction, would require him to plead guilty to harassment. We were able to negotiate for an ACD, an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, which didn’t require our client to plead guilty to anything, and which would automatically be dismissed and sealed from our client’s record permanently in six months.

Sex crime

People v. J.S.

Jan 01, 2016

OUTCOME: No jail, probation, level 1 registration.

Our client was charged in Queens, part APN, for sexual crimes including: Rape in the Second Degree, Penal Law 130.30(1), Criminal Sexual Act in the Second Degree, Penal Law 130.45(1), and Endangering t ... he Welfare of a Child, Penal Law 260.10(1). Our client, who was 20 years old at the time, was accused of having sex with a 13 year old girl on at least two separate occasions. Because of the age of the alleged victim, the crime required only that intercourse of some kind happened, without having to consider whether or not the alleged victim consented. Considering that the alleged victim became pregnant, which resulted in the birth of a child, it was almost impossible to defend against these charges. On the top count, Rape in the Second Degree, our client was facing two to seven years of state prison time and mandatory sex offender registration. Because of our client’s lack of a criminal history, the prosecution offered one year in prison on what would be a violent felony conviction, carrying more severe collateral consequences than a non violent charge. Despite the prosecution’s evidence, after over one year of negotiations, we were able to obtain an offer with no jail time on a non violent charge, Rape in the Third Degree, Penal Law 130.25 with level 1 registration meaning that he would not be visible online and his registration would be private.

Criminal defense

People v T.V.

Jan 01, 2016

OUTCOME: Case Dismissed

Our client was charged in Manhattan, part F, with felony gun charges, including Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, Penal Law 265.03(3), a “violent felony offense” which carries signi ... ficantly more prison time than a non-violent felony charge and more collateral issues for the future. The prosecution claimed that a 911 caller reported that our client had a firearm in his possession. The police swarmed the vehicle while he was lawfully parked on the street, ordered our client out of his car, and discovered a firearm loaded with six rounds in the trunk of the car inside of a backpack, with 29 additional rounds beside it. Our client was facing a minimum of 3 ½ years in state prison and a maximum of 15 years on these charges. Added to the fact that our client was on probation and had prior convictions in other states, advocating for our client was an uphill battle. Facing a probation violation for violating the terms of his probation by getting rearrested, our client was facing additional jail time. Nonetheless, for almost a year, we challenged the credibility of this 911 caller, arguing that the arrest was unlawful, citing his constitutional right to be free of a warrantless stop, search, and seizure. The case dragged on as we stuck to our position and refused to take an offer, until finally the prosecution moved to dismiss all of the charges. Not only was this arrest permanently sealed from our client’s record, but he was no longer facing the possibility of being violated on his probation for this arrest.

DUI and DWI

People v A.S.

Jan 01, 2016

OUTCOME: Case Dismissed

Our client was charged in Manhattan Criminal Court, part E, for misdemeanor charges including Operating a Motor Vehicle While Intoxicated, VTL sections 1192(2) and 1192(3), as well as Operating a Motor ... Vehicle while Impaired by Alcohol, VTL section 1192(1). The prosecution claimed that he was driving his Mercedes Benz down a closed-off street where construction was taking place and ran over a construction worker’s foot. They also claimed that our client then got out of the vehicle and left the scene, adding misdemeanor charges for Leaving the Scene of an Incident with Physical Injury Without Reporting (VTL 600(2)(a) and VTL 600(2)(c)). About 25 minutes after this alleged incident, our client was arrested while he was inside of an apartment blocks away. He was allegedly identified by the pedestrian as the person who hit him with the car, and he was accused of having made statements admitting to drinking and driving the car. His breathalyzer reading was over the legal limit for alcohol. Our client had a previous DWI (driving while intoxicated) charge in Florida, which made this case much more difficult. When our office was retained, the prosecution was offering him a misdemeanor plea, which would give him a criminal record; force him to install an ignition interlock device on any cars he owned or drove; pay thousands of dollars in fees and court costs; and drive his insurance rates sky high. We refused to accept that offer, prepared to go to trial. After a critical close review of the documents and investigation, we continuously hammered the point that because 25 minutes had passed between the time he was allegedly driving and when he was arrested and subsequently tested for alcohol, the prosecution could not prove that he was drinking at the time he was driving. The prosecution fought this, bitterly relying on statements he allegedly made when he was arrested and witnesses at the scene. After a legal battle that lasted over a year and a half and our constant pressure and motions for dismissal, they finally consented to the dismissal of all the charges, and the case was permanently dismissed and sealed from our client’s record, with the same effect as a “not guilty” verdict after trial.

Russ Kofman's Legal Cases (6)

People v. B.U.

People v. J.K.

People v. T.R.

People v. J.S.

People v T.V.

People v A.S.