Covered by NYDaily News. Las Vegas man accused of threatening a prominent attorney and making vile remarks.
Covered by New York Times, and other outlets. Fake heiress accused of conning the city’s wealthy, and has an HBO special being made about her.
Accused of stalking Alec Baldwin. The case garnered nationwide attention, with USAToday, NYPost, and other media outlets following it closely.
Juror who prompted calls for new Ghislaine Maxwell trial turns to lawyer who defended Anna Sorokin.
Clients can use our portal to track the status of their case, stay in touch with us, upload documents, and more.
Regardless of the type of situation you're facing, our attorneys are here to help you get quality representation.
We can setup consultations in person, over Zoom, or over the phone to help you. Bottom line, we're here to help you win your case.
The Spodek Law Group understands how delicate high-profile cases can be, and has a strong track record of getting positive outcomes. Our lawyers service a clientele that is nationwide. With offices in both LA and NYC, and cases all across the country - Spodek Law Group is a top tier law firm.
Todd Spodek is a second generation attorney with immense experience. He has many years of experience handling 100’s of tough and hard to win trials. He’s been featured on major news outlets, such as New York Post, Newsweek, Fox 5 New York, South China Morning Post, Insider.com, and many others.
In 2022, Netflix released a series about one of Todd’s clients: Anna Delvey/Anna Sorokin.
Why Clients Choose Spodek Law Group
The reason is simple: clients want white glove service, and lawyers who can win. Every single client who works with the Spodek Law Group is aware that the attorney they hire could drastically change the outcome of their case. Hiring the Spodek Law Group means you’re taking your future seriously. Our lawyers handle cases nationwide, ranging from NYC to LA. Our philosophy is fair and simple: our nyc criminal lawyers only take on clients who we know will benefit from our services.
We’re selective about the clients we work with, and only take on cases we know align with our experience – and where we can make a difference. This is different from other law firms who are not invested in your success nor care about your outcome.
If you have a legal issue, call us for a consultation.
We are available 24/7, to help you with any – and all, challenges you face.
Last Updated on: 26th July 2023, 08:56 pm
In the realm of criminal proceedings, the jury takes the baton of judgment to discern the guilt or innocence of an accused individual. Meanwhile, the judge steps into the picture to determine the appropriate penalty in instances of confirmed guilt. Informed by the existing criminal laws applicable to the situation and location, the judge’s verdict is formulated. It is crucial to seek the guidance of a criminal defense attorney immediately after being indicted. After all, comprehending the full scope and implications of every charge is not a feat every defendant can accomplish.
Every criminal law book reserves a segment proposing the potential repercussions aligned with each crime. These implications span across a range of years, pointing towards the minimum and maximum sentences an accused might receive. Variables such as the defendant’s age and any past criminal records seep into the judge’s decision-making process when determining the punishment.
New York’s laws provide a crystal-clear picture of the lowest and highest possible terms of incarceration. A judge’s challenge lies in arriving at a punishment that diverges from these boundaries. As an instance, in second-degree robbery scenarios, the minimum tenure is a year, while the upper limit stretches up to fifteen years.
Statutory laws occasionally prescribe alternative forms of punishment applicable in less severe instances. These can take the form of restitution, community service, or monetary fines. For those finding restitution financially burdensome, community service emerges as a viable alternative.
During a robbery trial, the judge weighs in on various factors. These factors include the value of stolen property, the degree of violence exercised, and the victim’s profile. Understanding these factors gives the judge a more profound insight into the perpetrator’s character.
The presence of violence during a robbery escalates the charges due to the categorization of the act as an aggravated assault. In certain jurisdictions, weapon use does not stand alone as a separate crime. However, it significantly influences the resulting sentence, typically resulting in a more extended punishment period.
Mitigating factors play a pivotal role in reducing the intensity of the crime and, correspondingly, the punishment. Acceptance of crime, return of stolen property, and a clean past record can potentially serve as mitigating factors.
When facing robbery charges, the accused has an array of defensive routes at their disposal.
In a criminal trial, the onus lies with the government to establish the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, the defendant’s mission is to ensure the government falls short of this level of certainty. This can be achieved by presenting evidence that contradicts the prosecution’s claims or by challenging the prosecution’s evidence. Alibis, eye-witness testimonies, and video footages can serve as essential components in proving the defendant’s innocence. If the jury harbors any doubts regarding the prosecution’s allegations, the accused might walk free.
Demonstrating duress – that the defendant was coerced into committing the crime
under threats of bodily harm or death – can offer a solid defense against robbery charges. However, this is notoriously difficult to prove and has often been dismissed by courts, especially when the fear of harm was minimal or if there were chances to avoid committing the crime without the risk of injury.
The entrapment defense is used when the defendant was pushed into committing the robbery. Although challenging to establish, they can be potent defenses when applicable. The defendant needs to show the victim provoked the robbery to bring charges against them. If the defendant had any intent to commit the robbery, this defense crumbles, even if other parties have engineered the crime to gather evidence against the accused.
Intoxication can serve as an affirmative defense, where any element of the robbery can’t be proved.
In some states, voluntary intoxication serves as a defense, not for dismissing charges but for pleading to a lesser one. Robbery involves an intent to steal someone’s property using violence. If the defendant was intoxicated during the act, the court must establish whether the accused had the necessary intent. This is where an affirmative defense comes into play since the intent cannot be conclusively determined. If proven, the defendant might be convicted of lesser charges due to the lower threshold for intent.
A defendant might be excused from criminal behavior if they can prove their intoxication was not a result of their actions. This involves showing that they became intoxicated without their knowledge or against their will.
Please fill out the form below to receive a free consultation, we will respond to
your inquiry within 24-hours guaranteed.