Criminal Enterprise

Real Estate Fraudsters Trying to Clear Up Their Names With Fake WordPress Sites

admin — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 04:04:42 +0000

It tends to place a crimp in one's real estate business if Google Instant Search returns "mortgage fraud" with your name automatically. Take for instance our ancient friend, Frank Miale, who, by the way, is still out of jail pending sentencing from wayyyy back to 2009. Nearly got bumped off in the the process by a very upset defendant who is doing time when this dirt bag was the worst of the bunch and is out there – PREYING ON YOU AND I. Oh well, better luck next time! But, I digress.

mialeappearance

So did a quick search on Frank and what comes up – some new autoblog sites like frankmiale.com, frankmialemortgage.com, frankmialebank.com – you get the thought. So to make himself appear legitimate, he uses an autoblog plugin to pull someone else's material to really make himself sound intelligent on matters involving real estate, mortgages and business in general. Meanwhile, those houses back in 2009 he flipped (go back and read the archives on how he was working with the DA to make some quick cash) – of course they are in foreclosure. We knew that was coming – FHA flipping fraud seems to be ok if you are paying off the Manhattan DAs office. Keeps you out of jail too.

mialecase1

Mialecooperation

Isn't fantastic that he is still out there buying and flipping houses?

Sorry Frankie – we are still watching you and noting everything you do -your sleezy attorney too – Wally Duval. Saw her close friend and associate Valdas Duoba, Esq. or perhaps I should leave the Esq. off now, got arrested and pled to various mortgage fraud charges. And, poor Mr. Duoba just got hit with more – Suffolk County is keeping very busy. Oh Frank you know Mr. Duoba too right? He represented many of your buyers – what a coincidence!

Opinions in cases involving ineffective assistance and guilty pleas

admin — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:01:06 +0000

Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion for the Court in both cases, which were 5-4 decisions: Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper.

View full post on CrimProf Blog

New York State Law Enforcement Agencies Endorse Video Recording of Interrogations – Should Be Extended to District Attorney Debriefings

admin — Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:31:44 +0000

From the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York:

At a press conference in the well of the Legislative Office Building, leaders of the New York State District Attorneys Association, the New York State Sheriffs’ Association, the New York State Association of Chiefs of Police, the New York City Police Department and the New York State Police announced their support for video recording of interrogations and the adoption of statewide protocols to ensure the integrity of the practice.

Law enforcement in more than 40 counties in the state have already voluntarily developed programs for video recording the entire questioning of suspects who have been arrested for various designated felonies. These recordings capture critical evidence needed in the investigation and prosecution of criminal cases and preserve information used to resolve a person’s claim of innocence.

Franklin County District Attorney Derek P. Champagne, president of the New York State District Attorneys Association, said:: “The adoption of statewide protocols and best practices to govern video recording – as well as our collective support for identification procedures announced earlier this year – confirms law enforcement’s commitment to making honest, reliable and practical improvements to our criminal justice system. Going forward, that commitment will only continue and grow stronger as we seek other ways to ensure the integrity of the system.”

The New York State Guidelines for Recording Custodial Interrogations of Suspects were spearheaded by the Best Practices Committee of the District Attorneys Association. Using existing protocols from counties that have already embraced the practice, the committee made guidelines that are relevant to all regions of the state. In addition, extensive practical input, born from years of real-life experience, was received from the N.Y.P.D., the State Police and the Sheriffs’ and Chiefs’ associations.

Video recording of District Attorney Debriefings should also be mandated so as to avoid the temptation to not record exculpatory evidence by merely refusing to write same down during a debriefing. The District Attorney policy to avoid Rosario obligations but not writing down exculpatory material is reprehensible and violates the spirit of Rosario. The adversarial nature of a trial attorney has no place in the District Attorneys' offices where the goal should be to seek justice and not a merely a "win".

Opinion on section 1983 liability for failure to train on Brady obligations

admin — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 18:02:30 +0000

The case is Connick v. Thompson. Syllabus to follow.

View full post on CrimProf Blog

Davis Innocence Plea Rejected

admin — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:07:22 +0000

From ScotusBlog: The Supreme Court, without a noted dissent, on Monday cleared the way for the state of Georgia to carry out the execution of Troy Anthony Davis of Savannah, rejecting five different ways that Davis’s lawyers had sought to…

View full post on CrimProf Blog

Brady v Maryland – Outline of leading cases applying Brady rule

admin — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:16:34 +0000

BRADY OUTLINE (March 23, 2011)

by Jill Paperno, Special Assistant Monroe County Public Defender

Use the discussed cases to support your argument that Brady applies for trial and sentencing, that the DA cannot avoid the information or choose not to turn it over because they don’t believe it, it includes evidence going to the reliability and credibility of witnesses as well as other conduct (See Hunter) such as priors and cooperation agreements (and even agreements to place in a excellent word – See Cwikla- but if you knew or should have known about it it may not be a violation. A specific request is also better than a general request. Requests must be made on the record for an appellate court to be aware of them.

Cases

BRADY V. MARYLAND, 373 U.S.83 – Turnover of information is a requirement of 14th Amendment due process “We now hold that the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the excellent faith or terrible faith of the prosecution.” nb – Court did not say it had to be exculpatory, though DA’s will make the claim it does.

Please continue to New York Criminal Defense to read the entire outline.

Kott Decision Matches Kohring – Prosecutors Violated Brady

admin — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:10:19 +0000

In an unpublished memorandum choice, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Peter Kott's conviction, like Kohring, needed to be reversed because of Brady violations by prosecutors. The court in citing the Supreme Court's choice in Bagley said, that "there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been told to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different." The court remanded it to the district court to determine if the prosecution "acted flagrantly, willfully, or in terrible faith."

Judge Fletcher concurred and dissented in part, finding a new trial an insufficient remedy. She wrote to express the view that the court's supervisory authority should be used and the indictment should be dismissed with prejudice. Judge Fletcher stated:

"I am deeply troubled by the government's lack of contrition in this case. Despite their assurances that they take this matter seriously, the government attorneys have attempted to minimize the extent and seriousness of the prosecutorial misconduct and even assert that Kott received a honest trial — despite the the government's failure to tell thousands of pages that reveal, in part, prior inconsistent statements by the government's star witnesses, …, regarding the payments Kott allegedly received."

For more, please visit the White Collar Crime Prof Blog

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Vacates Conviction Because of a Violation of Brady/Giglio

admin — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 14:04:47 +0000

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a defendant's conviction and remanded the case for a new trial as a result of violations of Brady/Giglio. (USA v. Victor Kohring opinion) The defendant "Victor Kohring, a former member of the Alaska State House of Representatives, was convicted in federal district court on three counts of public corruption felonies: conspiracy to commit extortion and attempted extortion under color of official right and bribery under 18 U.S.C. § 371 (Count 1), attempted interference with commerce by extortion induced under color of official right in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) (Count 3), and bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(1)(B) (Count 4). Kohring was acquitted of Count 2—interference with commerce by extortion induced under color of official right in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a)." The Ninth Circuit court held: "We agree with the district court that the prosecution suppressed favorable material, but we respectfully disagree with its conclusion as to materiality. We conclude that the newly-told information, when viewed collectively, is material and that the prosecution violated Brady/Giglio. We vacate Kohring’s conviction and remand to the district court for a new trial."

Addendum – Court stated "On remand, the government told, for the first time, several thousand pages of documents, including 'FBI 302 reports,' undated and dated handwritten notes from interviews with Allen and Smith, e-mails, various memoranda, and police reports."

To read more, please visit White Collar Crime Prof Blog

Tomkovicz on the Right to Counsel

admin — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 01:46:37 +0000

James J. Tomkovicz (University of Iowa – College of Law) has posted Sacrificing Massiah: Confusion Over Exclusion and Erosion of the Right to Counsel on SSRN. Here is the abstract: "Sacrificing Massiah" examines the legitimacy and impacts of Kansas v….

View full post on CrimProf Blog

Criminally Innocent: How Can You Be Exonerated of a Crime That Never Happened?

admin — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 12:47:02 +0000

This is a disturbing story out of Texas wherein two, teenage brothers were accused of sexually molesting their 7 year year old cousin in 1999. One brother, after intense pressure by the detectives, falsely confessed and took a plea deal. His intent – to avoid a trial that would lead him to spend decades in jail and he was lead to believe that the charges would be dropped against his younger brother. However his younger brother was indeed charged, convicted after trial and sentenced to 20 years behind bars. The cousin later recanted her accusations and maintains that she was never sexually molested and yet, the State refuses to vacate the convictions.

For the full story see The Austin Chronicle.