TO: Steve Mazzalonga
FROM: Folayan Sokoya
RE: section 782 and "Dwelling"
DATE: April 7, 2018
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On March 31,2018, Defendant, Scott Lang, broke into the buildings of Al Dente’s 10 Main street plot to remove wine and coin properties. The State has charged Scott under the two counts of Burglary in the second degree, subsection 2. Admittedly the petitioner entered without consent but however adamantly denies the building and tunnel can be considered dwellings under New York law. Al Dente on the other hand, the owner, who had been robbed as he was walking from the arcade to his home, gave statement of recently building an underground tunnel connecting arcade to his home. The buildings are in no way connected to each other above
…show more content…
The building is a dwelling.
There is no challenging fact to the building not being a dwelling. This arcade is neither an apartment, trailer, nor living quarter within which the owner and his family reside. While weighing whether the structure is a living quarter, the courts will thoroughly evaluate the activities that take action within the structure. The invisible connection of the primary residence is concealed to all thus giving the use of multiple underground dwellings.
The court must also present dismissal proof of the violation Multiple Dwelling Law - MDW § 142 New York Consolidated Laws, Multiple Dwelling Law.
1. When such a dwelling is more than eighty feet in height measured from the lowest point of the yard or of any curb on which any part of the dwelling faces, whichever is lower, and any room in such dwelling below the level of the highest curb which any part of such dwelling faces is occupied for living purposes as permitted in paragraph f of subdivision one of section thirty-four , the yard at the level of such highest curb shall be set back so as to be at least eight feet greater in depth than the yard below such level unless the yard opens directly upon a
…show more content…
From each apartment below the level of such highest curb at least one means of egress shall lead directly to such fire-terrace in a manner approved by the department. Such fire-terrace shall be protected by a guard railing approved by the department, and shall afford safe and unobstructed access either directly to a street or to a covered fireproof passage at least three feet in width and seven feet in height leading directly and without obstruction to a street.
The issues in the case must dismiss whether or not evidence that exists can prove the illegal entry without consent. The owner must be shown at fault in constructing the illegal tunnel. The obvious attempt at opening a hatch, and setting off a discrete alarms shows the owner’s intent to partion the arcade as a multiple dwelling. The owner’s credibility must also not be linked to his unrelated previous experience being robbed. The owner’s admission that this was indeed a second encounter with danger will only weaken the case
Application/Analysis: While using a previous case DePasquale v. State 757.1988, that court held in this case that the defendant was not entrapped when he robbed that undercover female decoy. The court held that the officers committed no misconduct, they also put five factors that show that Miller intended to steal from the decoy. The fact that Mill asked Officer Leavitt for money first and after Leavitt told him no; Miller took it upon himself to take the money away. This act was enough to show Miller intentionally committed larceny, the court held that Miller was not
James T. Johnson was a young man who had a good job working as a construction worker. Although, he had a job and worked every day he still lived at home with his mother. Furthermore, he was the type of young man who went to work on time and after work he would come home. Unfortunately, there were occasions where he would go out with a few of his co-workers on a Friday he still came home afterwards. Nevertheless, he was hiding a secret from his mother that later led to him being arrested. Now, rather than James uses his money he had earned from working, he burglarized homes and garages in the communities in his area. After burglarizing these homes he would then sell the items he had stolen via the internet or a pawn shop in two different counties.
In the Late nineteenth century the population was growing at a rapid pace. The country had people flooding the biggest cities in the country such as New York City and Chicago. These populations were gaining more and more people every single year and the country has to do something to make places for these people to live. The government would go on to create urban housing programs. These programs were created to make homes for these people to live in. At the time it provided a place for people to live but as the populations grew it became a more cramped and rundown area because of the large populations in one place. These reforms eventually led to these areas becoming dangerous, they were rundown, and it created a hole that was difficult for people to get out of.
In the end of 18th century to 19th century, more and more people began moving into developed cities. Especially in New York City, thousands of new immigrants were seeking a better life than the one they had before. Tenements were built as a way to accommodate this growing population, and the majority people who lived in tenements were working-class, cause back to that time most tenements were located near factories, tenements were highly concentrated in the poorest neighborhoods of the city. A typical tenement building had four to five stories, in order to maximize the number of renters and to maximize their profits, builders wasted little space and buildings that had been single-family residence were divided into multiple living spaces to fit in more people, early tenements might dwell in almost 90 percent of their lots. There were no housing laws to protect the rights for people who lived in tenements until they stated The First
The plaintiff in Mitchell activated the store’s antishoplifting device alarm while exiting the store. Id. at 632. The store security guard detained her by taking her shopping bag and investigating the items inside of the bag. Id. In Colonial Stores the court held that the store did not detain the plaintiff in a reasonable time because the store did not conduct an investigation while the plaintiff was being detained. Colonial Stores, Inc. v Fishel, 288 S.E.2d 21, 23 (Ga. App. 1981). The store manager and security guard in Colonial Stores detained the plaintiff without investigating further to see if the plaintiff was guilty of shoplifting. Id. The court stated that the purpose of detaining someone suspected of shoplifting was to investigate. Id. The store’s failure to investigate makes them liable for false imprisonment according to the court in Colonial Stores.
You have asked the following questions: “We have a 3 story Type V residential building being protected with a 13R system. The first floor is a parking garage. Is the concealed combustible space between the first and second floor require to be protected? ” In response to your question, we have reviewed the 2010 edition of NFPA 13R you indicated as the applicable standard. Our informal interpretation is that the concealed combustible space is not required to be protected.
In this paper, I will discuss and give details as to what is needed for police to get a warrant and under what circumstances they are allowed to enter a home without a warrant. I will also provide an analysis as to whether the police had the legal right to access the Ellis home and their bedrooms. Additionally, I will explain the exclusionary rule and its importance and how it relates to this scenario. Lastly, I will also describe the steps in conducting this investigation while ensuring that individual’s rights were being protected and the evidence that was gathered would be admissible in a court of law. In the following paragraph, I will discuss what it takes for the police t...
The relatives must have a sharp thought of the existing climate conditions and they ought to have an arrangement to empty the building in most exceedingly terrible cases. They must be given a fitting direction when such circumstance happens. Typically the children in the house must be given legitimate guidelines for their survival and
The first evidence is the judge and jury ignored the physical evidence that both men weren’t in area when the crime happen, and their guns were not the same caliber there were a .38 while the gun reported was a .32. The police also had fingerprints from the buick the was used in the South Braintree crime. But the fingerprints didn’t match and the police instead questioned them on their religion, political beliefs and associates instead of the crime. The prosecutors used witness but the witness accounts made no sense. Meaning it didn’t match the descriptions of the men and the their stories weren’t the same and had loops hole. One witness said she saw the shooting from 60 feet away and said one of the men which she said was Sacco had big hands but he had small hands. Another said they saw Sacco kill Berardelli (one of the men who was killed in South Braintree), but the defense question and she said she hidden under workbench when the shots fired and didn’t see the men. The third witness said she talked to a man under a car fixing it as Sacco but her companion said she didn’t talk or saw him. Instead it was a pale sick young man. The day of the crime Sacco was getting a passport. A official confirmed Sacco was their getting a passport but the picture he had was too big. Other witnesses said they saw Vanzetti selling fish in Boston and some even bought some. The last piece of evidence is that the prosecutors tried to convicted them using consciousness of guilt. It is when you are guilty of a crime because you are lying about your actions because you are guilty. They lied and said they didn’t know Mike Boda. They did this because they wanted a car to transport their anarchist pamphlets to a safe place. They wanted to do this because the police could arrest anyone with these pamphlets and the people would be
It is a stand-alone structure with the closest building approximately 24 feet away from it on the D side of the building. The structure is surrounded by blacktopped driveways, parking lots, and cement sidewalks. To the far rear is a wooded area that is also approximately 24 feet from the structure. The building is an older building with type 3 ordinary construction with a mostly combustible interior and a non-combustible masonry for the exterior with a flat steel-truss floor-ceiling assembly. This type of roof provides a large space between the ceiling and the roof where duct work for the HVAC and sprinkler systems have been run as well as wires for 360° video monitoring equipment throughout the building. With this type of roof system, firefighters should be able to make aggressive ventilation using saws; however, because safety is paramount, crews should always remain on ledger walls or structural members while working. By making sounding and diagnostic cuts they can determine the location of structural members while still allowing the ventilation crew to monitor the roof conditions and act accordingly. There is a ladder running from the base of side C (back) of the building up to the top of the roof allowing firefighters access to the roof. There is no basement in this
Hastings County, Social Housing, “Boxed In” April 2005 (pg. 6, 7, 15, 16, 23, 24, 108) Local Sources (pg. 110-114) Retrieved from: http://www.hastingscounty.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=115&Itemid=88
apartments in certain areas of a city. The goal is usually to protect the rights
Fremont Weeks was was convicted of using the mail to transport illegal lottery tickets. When Weeks was arrested, police officers went to Weeks' house to search it. The officers gained entry to his house after a neighbor told them where to find the spare key. Officers entered Weeks’ house without a search warrant. The officers
Burglary is typically recognized, from a legal perspective, as the unauthorized entry into any type of structure. A common misconception is that the crime of burglary is specific to breaking into a home or business; however, this is not the case. Moreover, for a burglary to occur there is no need for a physical breaking and entering, in fact, a burglary can be committed by an individual simply trespassing and walking into a structure through an open door. “Most states and the Model Penal Code use the same basic definition of burglary and incorporate the same three basic elements of which include the unauthorized breaking and entry into a building or occupied structure with the intent to commit a crime inside” (Reuters, 2013).
In this Case No. 11-2121. Parents of a child reported an incident in which they stated that their child had sexual intercourse with an adult male. This is a case between United States of America, Appellee, v. Darrin Roy ANDERSON, Appellant, in which they hold Anderson accountable of traveling with the intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b), to which Anderson pleaded guilty. The evidence retrieved in case 2 was the text, the photos and further investigations indicated that Anderson withdrew $200 on August 11, 2009, from a cash machine in Walhalla, North Dakota, where he worked. He withdrew another $200 from a cash machine in East Grand Forks, Minnesota, on August 12, 2009. Funds from the same account were used to pay for a room at the East Grand Inn on August 12, 2009. Facebook was used as a method to trick the defendant in thinking that the person he is communicating with is one of the adolescents he had sexual intercourse with. The two parties communicated back and forth and Anderson agreed on meeting up with M. R’s mother. The outcome was that Anderson actually had more than 800 private chats with more than 800 adolescent girls, this was after a search was launched by Detective Hajicek. Anderson was then found guilty and prisoned for 114 months. The result of this case is quite fair as there was sufficient evidence to prove that Anderson was internet