NY Supreme Court Rules Criminal Reform Law Unconstitutional: DA

Lindenhurst NY

25 October, 2021

3:09 PM

Description

WYANDANCH, NY — A New York State law that allows criminal defendants to request access to crime scenes — including an individual's home — has been deemed unconstitutional after a Suffolk County Court ruling on Friday. The Suffolk County District Attorney's announced Friday that in the case of People v. Jose Torres, New York State Supreme Court denied the Legal Aid Society of Suffolk County's motion to grant a defense attorney and investigator access to a home at which the defendant was accused of committing a burglary. The office stated that the criminal procedure law, or Article 245.30 (2), was unconstitutional and that it violated the victim's Fourth Amendment rights and expectation of privacy under the U.S. Constitution, as well as the victim's rights under Article I § 12 of the New York State Constitution. "This is one of the many statutes included in the 2020 bail and discovery reforms that I opposed from the very beginning," said Suffolk County District Attorney Tim Sini. "It has the potential to re-traumatize crime victims, is invasive of victims' privacy, and – as we successfully argued in this case – is blatantly unconstitutional." According to the district attorney's office, the law was passed by state lawmakers and enacted in 2020, as part of sweeping criminal justice reforms, including amendments to bail and discovery laws. Jose Torres was accused of stealing a safe containing $60,000 in cash from the lower level apartment of his residence in Wyandanch on August 2, said prosecutors. He was charged on August 10 with second-degree burglary, a felony; third-degree burglary, a felony; and seventh-degree criminal possession of a controlled substance, a misdemeanor, for his possession of a quantity of crack cocaine, officials said. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant District Attorney James Scahill. "This decision is a win for victims' rights and a win for public safety," said Sini. "We will continue to oppose this law should the decision be challenged, and will fight to protect residents' safety."