April 05, 2021

Joel Rudin quoted in Law360 article on upcoming Supreme Court case


On March 8, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Thompson v. Clark, which presents the question of whether a plaintiff alleging that law enforcement officials maliciously prosecuted him in violation of the Constitution must prove that he won his state criminal case on the basis that he was innocent. An article appearing today in Law360 quotes several leading scholars and practitioners, including Joel, on this hugely important issue.

The Thompson case involves similar questions to those at issue in two recent cases on which Joel has been co-counsel: the Supreme Court case McDonough v. Smith and the pending Second Circuit case Smalls v. City of New York, which Joel argued on March 8.

March 31, 2021

Firm wins reversal of first-degree rape conviction in Queens


Today the New York Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed our client’s conviction for first-degree rape in People v. King. Jacob Loup took the lead in writing the briefs, with the collaboration of firm principal Joel Rudin, who argued the appeal.

In today’s ruling, the Appellate Division agreed with our argument that the trial court violated Mr. King’s constitutional and statutory right to be present when it held an ex partein camera interview with the complainant during the trial. It also agreed that the trial court (1) abused its discretion by striking the complainant’s cross-examination testimony about her psychiatric history, (2) improperly let the prosecution introduce a statement allegedly made by Mr. King despite their failure to give proper statement notice under CPL § 710.30, and (3) improperly allowed the statement to be admitted in violation of People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264 (1901).

You can read the decision here.

March 09, 2021

Joel Rudin argues important civil rights appeal in Second Circuit


Firm principal Joel Rudin today argued an important civil rights case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Listen to the oral argument here. At issue is whether a plaintiff in a federal civil rights case claiming that fabricated evidence was used against him must also prove that he won his state criminal case on the basis of his innocence. Very few criminal cases are resolved that way. In this case, Smalls v. City of New York, our client’s gun possession conviction was reversed on appeal, and the indictment dismissed, not on the basis of his innocence, but because police illegally stopped him, in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. After a federal civil jury found he was framed by police using fabricated evidence, the federal trial judge dismissed the case because the state court had not indicated in its decision that Mr. Smalls was innocent.

Retained to handle the appeal by Mr. Smalls and his trial attorney, we are seeking to have the jury’s verdict reinstated. Resolution of our appeal will depend upon the Second Circuit’s interpretation of a recent Supreme Court decision, McDonough v. Smith, 139 S. Ct. 2149 (2019), a case in which Mr. Rudin was co-counsel. You can read our Second Circuit briefs, authored by Mr. Rudin and associates Jacob Loup and Matthew Wasserman, here (opening) and here (reply). An amicus brief supporting our appeal was submitted by 12 leading civil rights and public interest organizations. You can read it here.

March 05, 2021

Firm wins motion to amend complaint


The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted Rhian Taylor’s motion to amend his complaint yesterday, allowing him to add claims of evidence fabrication and excessive pretrial detention under the Fourth Amendment. Mr. Taylor alleges that he spent nearly nine years in jail and prison because of the police and prosecution’s withholding of exculpatory and impeachment evidence. In addition to his federal lawsuit, Mr. Taylor’s suit in the Court of Claims for his unjust conviction remains ongoing. Matthew Wasserman drafted the briefs and argued the motion, under firm principal Joel Rudin’s supervision.

You can read the district court’s opinion here.

February 02, 2021

Firm files amicus brief on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers


The firm filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the case of Farhane v. United States today. The Government is trying to denaturalize naturalized citizen Abderrahmane Farhane on the basis of his 2006 guilty plea. We argue that the Sixth Amendment requires defense counsel to advise naturalized citizens of the denaturalization and deportation risks of a guilty plea. Matthew Wasserman and Haran Tae wrote the brief on behalf of the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

You can read our brief here.

January 29, 2021

Joel Rudin is quoted in the New York Times


Firm principal Joel Rudin was quoted in a recent Times article about the Queens District Attorney’s Office. The article also cited information compiled by the firm showing that, between 1985 and 2017, judges had ruled that Queens prosecutors had “failed to disclose information to the defense or committed other misconduct” at least 117 times.

You can read the article here.

January 25, 2021

Firm gets client’s murder conviction reversed on appeal, then gets indictment dismissed on remand


In August 2020, the firm won the reversal of a Suffolk County murder conviction because the trial judge made an improper deal with a witness to testify for the prosecution. People v. Greenspan, 186 A.D.3d 505 (2d Dep’t 2020). On remand, in January 2021, our motion convinced the trial court to dismiss the case on the basis that the prosecution had impaired the integrity of the grand jury proceedings by, among other things, withholding exculpatory evidence. Jacob Loup took the lead in writing the briefs, with the collaboration of firm principal Joel Rudin, who argued the appeal.

You can read the Second Department’s decision here.

January 15, 2021

Firm establishes that holding someone in prison past his conditional release date violates the Eight and Fourteenth Amendments


In a precedent-setting decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that prison officials violated Devar Hurd’s Eight Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment and Fourteenth Amendment right to due process when they held him in prison for almost a year after his conditional release date. While the Court of Appeals held that correctional officials were entitled to qualified immunity, this decision clearly establishes that it violates the constitution to imprison someone after their mandatory release date. The firm previously obtained a substantial settlement for Mr. Hurd from other defendants in the case. Jacob Loup drafted the briefs and argued the appeal, under firm principal Joel Rudin’s supervision.

You can read the Second Circuit’s opinion here.

August 26, 2020

Firm client’s lawsuit is covered in Gothamist


A recent article in Gothamist profiled Jawaun Fraser’s lawsuit against the City of New York. Mr. Fraser’s conviction was overturned when it came out after trial that the narcotics officers who arrested him—and provided the only evidence against him at trial—had been sued dozens of times for allegedly making false arrests and fabricating evidence.

You can read the article here.

August 06, 2020

City and State agree to $2.4 million settlement for wrongful conviction lawsuit


The City of New York has agreed to pay $1.7 million to settle a wrongful conviction lawsuit brought by Shuaib O’Neill. As alleged in the lawsuit, NYPD officers falsely claimed to have found marijuana and a gun on Mr. O’Neill during a stop-and-frisk, and coerced a false confession from him. Mr. O’Neill served three years in prison and more than two years on parole before his conviction was reversed on direct appeal.

The firm previously won a settlement of $699,000 for Mr. O’Neill in a parallel action in the New York Court of Claims.