Drug Crime
Drug arrests have decreased in recent years, resulting in a reduction in both the number of felony drug prosecutions and the percentage of our caseload that these cases comprise. In 1996, drug cases accounted for more than 65% of the Office’s felony-level defendants. In 2005, fewer than half of Bronx felony defendants were prosecuted on drug charges. Nevertheless, drug crime is still a very serious problem in the Bronx.
Over the past 16 years combined, 57% of Bronx defendants convicted on felony drug charges were sentenced to state prison, a higher proportion than that for either New York State (53%) or the rest of New York City (52%). Fifty-five percent of Bronx defendants convicted on felony drug charges were sentenced to state prison.
The District Attorney employs a number of strategies to reduce drug crime in the Bronx. A combination of vigorous prosecution of defendants who have been accused of drug crimes, civil
enforcement remedies and allowing appropriate defendants to enter drug treatment as an alternative to incarceration helps to ensure that justice is done. As in other parts of the City and nation, drug crime constitutes a persistent problem in Bronx County. Through careful screening of defendants' criminal history and drug use, the Office seeks to identify defendants who might benefit from drug treatment and become assets to their community.
Case: Drugs, Guns, Money & Working Undercover
In January 2005, the New York City Police Department’s Bronx Narcotics Unit began an undercover operation in the Southeast Bronx. This operation resulted in the arrest of multiple drug dealers involving narcotics sales in both the Bronx and Manhattan. At the outset, undercover officers began purchasing small quantities of cocaine from three drug dealers, 21-year-old Issiah Gomez, 33-year-old Leo (pseudonym) and 23-year-old Jamal Bonneau. The three acquaintances allegedly sold drugs together from the Bronx building in which they lived. Over the next few months, Gomez sold cocaine to undercover officers on nine occasions, eventually selling more than four ounces.
In May 2005, an undercover officer began purchasing weapons from Gomez. Between May and July 2005, the officer purchased seven firearms, including a Chinese-made semi-automatic rifle.
In August 2005, the investigation expanded beyond the Bronx. It is further alleged that the undercover officer purchased additional cocaine from Leo, who led the officer into northern Manhattan. Here the officer met 29-year-old Ken (pseudonym). In late August 2005, the officer purchased a kilogram of cocaine in upper Manhattan from Leo, Ken and others. At this point, police arrested a number of individuals. The youngest of those arrested was a 16-year-old Manhattan girl who pleaded guilty to a felony charge and was placed on probation. The investigation culminated with the arrest of the supplier of the kilogram of cocaine, 26-year-old Shamel Alston. He pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced to five years incarceration.
On March 31, 2006, one of the three original drug dealers, Jamal Bonneau, pleaded guilty to attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. He was sentenced on April 18, 2006, to three years imprisonment and three years of post-release supervision. Gomez pleaded guilty on April 27, 2006, to criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree. Leo and Ken are awaiting trial. |
Drug Sales Near Schools
New York State law provides enhanced penalties for those who sell drugs within 1,000 feet of school grounds, and the Bronx District Attorney continues to focus special attention on these cases. In 2005, Narcotics Bureau staff screened 951 felony school drug arrests for presentation to a grand jury for indictment. Of these, 152 defendants agreed to be prosecuted by superior court information instead of indictment. Another 299 were indicted by a grand jury.
Of 697 school case dispositions in 2005, the bureau obtained 411 felony convictions by plea and two by verdict, resulting in a 81% felony conviction rate. Only 21 defendants (3%) were acquitted or had charges against them dismissed. Three defendants died before their cases were disposed. Twenty-one convictions were replaced with Youthful Offender adjudications because of the age of the defendants and their history. (For defendants younger than 19, Youthful Offender status allows the court to impose a more favorable sentence than would otherwise be allowed and avoids the stigma of a criminal conviction.)
Drug Treatment Alternatives
Since 1992, the District Attorney has offered certain substance-abusing defendants who have been charged with narcotics offenses the opportunity to enter alternative-to-incarceration drug treatment programs. The first population to be offered this option in the Bronx was 16- to-19-year-old, first felony drug abusers. However, over the years the option has been offered to older offenders and those with a prior, non-violent felony conviction.
While the treatment options and alternative dispositions and sentences vary with the defendant’s age and prior record, the process is similar for all defendants considered for drug treatment as an alternative. Each candidate for diversion undergoes a thorough screening and evaluation to determine whether he or she is eligible for a drug treatment program. Factors considered in the evaluation include the defendant’s age, criminal record, history of substance abuse and suitability for rehabilitation.
Although not all drug abusers are successful in treatment, for some the opportunity to enter drug treatment makes the difference between a life lost to drugs and illegal activity, and a productive life and job.
The individual’s substance abuse history, age and other factors determine the type of treatment and its duration. His or her criminal history affects the case outcome following either successful completion of treatment (leading to dismissal or reduction of the charges) or failure to complete treatment, resulting in a prison sentence. A total of 949 Bronx defendants entered drug treatment as an alternative to incarceration in 2005, and close to 10,000 defendants have been placed in drug treatment programs since 1992.
Bronx Treatment Court
Since 1999, the Bronx Treatment Court (BXTC) has provided substance abuse treatment under close judicial supervision to felony narcotics offenders as an alternative to incarceration (ATI). BXTC, like the national drug court model, includes swift defendant assessment and placement in treatment, close judicial supervision of offenders, urinalysis and graduated sanctions and incentives. The Bronx Treatment Court is a collaborative effort of representatives from the Office of Court Administration, the Bronx District Attorney’s Office, the Bronx defense bar and drug treatment providers.
Defendants must be 19 years of age or older (younger defendants are eligible for diversion through other programs), charged with committing specific crimes, have no prior felony convictions and no prior convictions for violent crimes. BXTC defendants plead guilty to a felony charge with deferred sentence and immediately enter treatment. Defendants who successfully complete the 12-18 month treatment program have their felony charges dismissed or reduced to a misdemeanor. Participants who fail to complete treatment are sentenced to a state prison term.
One hundred fifty-one clients were enrolled in treatment programs through the Bronx Treatment Court in 2005. A total of 1,307 clients were enrolled from its inception in March 1999 through the end of 2005.
In 2005, nearly 800 Bronx defendants who were not eligible for BXTC were diverted through other treatment programs. Since 1992, we have placed a total of 9,646 defendants in treatment programs.
Bronx Mental Health Court
The Bronx District Attorney’s Office has been diverting defendants to drug treatment for many years and developed formal partnerships to do so in October 1992. Over time it became clear that some of these defendants were suffering from both drug dependency and mental illness. While staff always tried to place such non-violent defendants in treatment programs that were appropriate for persons with dual diagnoses, in 2002 we entered into a formal partnership with Treatment Alternatives for Safer Communities (TASC) and Research Triangle Institute to create the Bronx Mental Health Court. As the grantee, this Office administers the grants and sub-grants, monitors compliance with the terms of grants and with sub-grantees’ letters of agreement, has fiscal responsibility, and provides staff to work in the court part.
In 2003, eligibility for diversion to the Bronx Mental Health Court was extended to defendants with serious mental illness (with or without drug dependency). In 2004, the court’s capacity was further expanded to provide services for mentally ill defendants with HIV/AIDS. Using federal funds to provide mental health and drug dependence screening and assessment, placement and program evaluation, we recommended 196 defendants for placement in 2005. These defendants are subject to the same level of supervision and sanctions for failure to complete treatment as other diverted defendants.
Case: A Mental Health Court Success Story
On August 13, 2003, Tim, 36, was arrested for selling narcotics to an undercover detective. On September 22, the Judge referred Tim to the Bronx TASC Mental Health Unit for assessment and evaluation. This was his first and only arrest. Tim pleaded guilty on October 22, 2003, to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and entered the Bronx Mental Health Court. He was told he would receive a prison sentence of two-to-six years if he did not remain successfully in treatment.
Tim’s psychiatric history began in his native country. As an adolescent, he experienced numerous episodes of agitation and talking to himself while in class. In tenth grade, Tim was diagnosed with a mental illness. His alcohol and crack cocaine use started at age 18. He “got use to the voices” and found himself in and out of hospital emergency rooms after passing out from drug use.
Perhaps because of his drug use, Tim developed a heart condition that required open heart surgery. Tim stopped using drugs after his doctors warned him of the dangers to his health, but he continued to drink. Tim tried to stop drinking but could not. In 1998, Tim was hospitalized after an attempted suicide. It was around the time of these struggles with depression that Tim was arrested.
Tim was diagnosed by the Bronx TASC Mental Health Unit with a serious mental illness, as well as a heart condition, hypertension and asthma. His initial placement consisted of attending day treatment at Fordham-Tremont Community Mental Health Center while living in the community. With the support of an Intensive Case Manager, Tim was able to keep medical appointments and access services. After about three months, following an argument with his girlfriend, Tim became homeless and entered New York City’s shelter system. Tim describes this time in his life as “entering into hell.” The TASC Mental Health team diverted Tim to a shelter where he could continue his program at Fordham-Tremont while accessing medical services at Columbian Presbyterian Hospital.
While at the shelter, Tim’s property was periodically stolen. After one year in the shelter, Tim was placed in a supportive housing facility. Throughout this time, Tim remained drug free and medication compliant. He followed through with appointments and housing leads and remained in good spirits. Following his success in treatment, Tim returned to court on July 15, 2005. His case was dismissed. Tim left the courtroom with his fist raised in victory, but he continues treatment with his “friends at Fordham-Tremont.”
|
Using Civil Enforcement to Fight Drugs
In addition to criminal prosecution of drug offenses and diversion of appropriate offenders to drug treatment programs, the District Attorney successfully used other approaches as adjuncts to prosecution. These included civil enforcement proceedings and prevention programs. Two civil enforcement methods used by this Office are asset forfeiture and eviction. Asset forfeiture deprives drug dealers and illegal gamblers of profits made through criminal enterprise, and evicting them (or those who house them) removes their base of operation.
Asset Forfeiture
The Asset Forfeiture Unit works with the Office’s Narcotics and Investigations Bureaus, US Customs, the FBI, the DEA, the Department of the Treasury, the Internal Revenue Service, and the NYPD’s Forfeiture Unit to ensure that drug offenders do not profit from their activity. The unit conducts investigations aimed at exposing criminal enterprises and tracing revenue flow into and out of these operations. These investigations can produce evidence incriminating higher-level suppliers and financiers and identify income and property derived through criminal activity. Both federal and state statutes allow for confiscation of such assets.
In 2005, the unit seized $276,208 in assets pursuant to Article 13-A of New York State Civil Practice Laws and Rules. According to New York State law, a major share of forfeited assets must be distributed to the New York State Office of Alcohol and Substance Abuse Services (OASAS) for drug treatment, education and prevention programs. This year, the Office contributed $88,362 to OASAS, bringing our total OASAS contribution over the past 17 years to $4,453,490. This year the Bronx District Attorney’s Office received $88,316 as its share of state forfeited assets. The NYPD’s portion of the forfeited funds totaled $104,278.
When state law does not provide a legal basis for forfeiture or federal law would make forfeiture easier, the case is referred to a federal agency to initiate forfeiture proceedings. In 2005, the unit referred 66 cases to various federal agencies for forfeiture action. Cases referred for federal forfeiture earned the Office $173,740 in 2005.
Eldorado Task Force
In addition to referring cases to federal agencies on an “as needed” basis, the Asset Forfeiture Unit is a member of an ongoing effort known as the Eldorado Task Force. The other members of the task force are the NYPD, US Customs, the Offices of the District Attorneys in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island, the Special Narcotics Prosecutor, the Internal Revenue Service and the New York State Banking Commission. The task force’s main focus is to investigate drug dealers who attempt to launder drug money.
Cases are generated through informants providing information about drug dealers to one or another of the member agencies. In addition, the task force investigates known drug dealers to determine where and how they are transporting money. Once someone has been arrested, his or her assets are seized and forfeiture proceedings are initiated. In 2005, a total of some $55,862,034 was seized in non-monetary assets as the result of investigations conducted by the task force.
Eviction
The Narcotics Evictions Unit initiates civil actions to remove tenants who are involved in the narcotics trade or who allow others to use their premises for illegal activities. This civil action is complementary to the Narcotics Bureau’s criminal action and proceeds independently of the criminal case. Evicting offenders deprives them of the site from which they conducted their criminal activity and thus improves the quality of life in the community. Even when criminal prosecution of a drug dealer fails to result in a conviction, evidence obtained through search warrants in a narcotics investigation can still be used appropriately to justify an eviction request in Housing Court.
All narcotics cases are reviewed by the Narcotics Evictions Unit to determine whether they meet the criteria for eviction. Once it is shown that eviction from a privately-owned building is warranted, the unit sends a Demand Letter informing the landlord that criminal activity is occurring in a particular apartment. The landlord must then take action in court to evict the appropriate tenant(s).
The Narcotics Evictions Unit assists landlords in these court actions by advising them on matters of procedure and providing evidence and witnesses to substantiate the charges that led to the request for an order of eviction. The Demand Letter is usually effective in eliciting the cooperation of landlords who might be apprehensive about initiating such proceedings on their own.
The District Attorney’s Office also identifies apartment units in New York City Housing Authority developments that are used to store or dispense narcotics and continues to investigate individuals carrying out narcotics activity. The Housing Authority’s attorneys then litigate their own eviction actions.
The unit continues to work closely with the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development and the NYPD Legal Bureau’s Civil Enforcement Unit to assist in the identification of premises that are a source of narcotics activity. The Narcotics Eviction Unit also works with community groups and tenants associations to rid these premises of narcotics activity, enabling law-abiding citizens to live in a drug-free environment.
In 2005, there were 169 drug locations closed by the unit. Of these, 78 were closed through eviction action taken against the tenant. In 66 cases, the tenant vacated the dwelling voluntarily. In the remaining 25 instances, the tenant was allowed to remain upon his or her stipulation to the court that the offending party would be permanently excluded from the premises and that the illegal activity would cease.
|