New York Plans to Unleash Chaos in New Year

This article was provided exclusively to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government by Judge John H. Wilson (Ret.)

The descent of California into chaos due to its government’s insistence on following hard-left ideology has been well documented, particularly in the ruination of its great cities. The same may be said for the once-great city of Detroit. As the New Year approaches, New York state is following suit.

In April of this year, the New York State legislature passed a bill which is intended “to end the use of monetary bail, reduce unnecessary pretrial incarceration and improve equity and fairness in the criminal justice system.” Known as the “Bail Elimination Act of 2019,” this new law, which takes effect on January 1, 2020, will do exactly that – in the majority of offenses, a Court no longer has the discretion to set cash bail on a criminal defendant.

Under CPL Sec. 510.10, prior to the changes made by the new law, a Court ” must, by a securing order, either release (a criminal defendant) on his own recognizance, fix bail or commit him to the custody of the sheriff.” Now, a Court shall…release the principal (criminal defendant) pending trial on the principal’s personal recognizance, unless the court finds on the record that release on recognizance will not reasonably assure the individual’s court attendance. In such instances, the court will release the individual under non-monetary conditions, selecting the least restrictive alternative that will reasonably assure the principal’s court attendance.”

Further, a Court is now required to “support its choice of alternative on the record. A principal shall not be required to pay for any part of the cost of release under non-monetary conditions.”

There are other aspects of this new legislation that will not be discussed here, including reducing the time a prosecutor has to bring a case to trial, and requiring prosecutors to provide evidence to the defense earlier in the life of a case than was previously required. These other changes are not as radical as the change at issue here – Courts no longer have the discretion to set bail in the majority of criminal cases in New York State.

Just what crimes are subject to these new rules? For example, felonies like Second Degree Burglary and Second Degree Robbery would Some individual thinks that it is grammatically incorrect and one must give credit to those who have managed to package what appears, on the surface, to be “penis order viagra india enlargement,” when instead, what men are really getting, is “penis enlargement.” Yes, I do realize those are the exact same therapeutic effect as the brand name medication as well as well-known Canadian local drugstore. An oral medicine will start its action within viagra canadian 30 to 45 minutes. This Kamagra is slightly costly if you choose oral jelly or viagra properien other items than oral pills. This is of course just speculation buy viagra online at this point. fall under the new release rules, however, it is shorter to discuss which crimes could still result in cash bail. For misdemeanors, only sex offenses (such as touching over the clothes, etc) and criminal contempt arising out of an underlying domestic case (for instance, a violation of an Order of Protection issued on behalf of one domestic partner against another) are subject to bail. For felonies, only violent crimes are subject to cash bail, such as Murder or Rape. But serious drug felonies, such as possession of a controlled substance with the intent to sell, or sale of a controlled substance, will be subject to the new rules.

In fact, when Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Anne Swern set a $100,000 bond on alleged drug dealer Arfhy Santos for driving down the sidewalk while fleeing DEA Agents, Santos’ defense lawyer argued for his release on the basis that his current charges ‘are not subject to bail under the new reform act.”

How drastic is this change? According to the Center for Court Innovation, “our analysis indicates that of the almost 205,000 criminal cases that were arraigned in New York City in 2018, the new legislation leaves money bail as an option in just 10 percent.” The Center notes that on April 1, 2019, 7,822 people were being held in New York City jails. Of these, “almost 5,000 were held pretrial and potentially impacted by the changes in the bail law. Our analysis finds that 43 percent of these 5,000 individuals…would have been released under the State’s bail reform.”

Though the law hasn’t taken effect yet, many of New York’s judges have already begun to follow the new bail rules. In November, Stathos Hugunnie was arrested by the NYPD for possession of three guns and a supply of both heroin and crack cocaine. Yet, despite a prior conviction for shooting a police officer for which Hugunnie was incarcerated for a least a decade, the Queens Criminal Court only set a $5,000 bail on Hugunnie, a bail he was able to easily post.

Further, to avoid a deluge of applications for release come January 1st, New York already has plans to release approximately 900 inmates from jail before the new bail rules take effect. According to the New York Post, those being released include “Jose “Catano” Jorge, charged with first-degree criminal sale of a controlled substance after a customer OD’d on fentanyl-laced heroin…(and) Jacob Morales, who has two prior assault convictions and allegedly pulled a razor on a No. 4 straphanger.”

The District Attorneys of both Staten Island and Queens, as well as numerous police officials across the state have asked the Legislature to reconsider the bail reform changes, or at the very least, give a “grace period” of at least 6 months before the statute takes effect. To date, Governor Andrew Cuomo refuses to reconsider the immediate implementation of the new law. Meanwhile, for his part, in anticipation of no longer needing the facility, New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio is busy planning to close New York City’s largest jail, Rikers Island.

The result of this change is readily apparent to everyone but the social engineers in Albany. According to New York PBA President Pat Lynch, while commenting on the low bail set on Stathos Hugunnie, “New Yorkers, this is your future, and the worst is still to come. The appalling and disturbing decisions that have now twice put a vicious cop-shooter back on our streets are not outliers — they are what our elected leaders have chosen.”

Photo: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Part 3: AMERICA’S STRATEGIC POSTURE

We conclude our summary of the urgent recommendation of the Congressional Committee on the nation’s Strategic Posture NON-NUCLEAR CAPABILITIES The Commission recommends: The United States urgently deploy a more resilient space architecture and adopt a strategy that includes both offensive and defensive elements to ensure U.S. access to and operations in space. The United States and its Allies take steps to ensure they are at the cutting edge of emerging technologies – such as big data analytics, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence (AI) – to avoid strategic surprise and potentially enhance the U.S. strategic posture. The United States prioritize funding and accelerate long-range non-nuclear precision strike programs to meet the operational need and in greater quantities than currently planned. x America’s Strategic Posture The United States develop and field homeland IAMD that can deter and defeat coercive attacks by Russia and China, and determine the capabilities needed to stay ahead of the North Korean threat.4 The Secretary of Defense direct research, development, test and evaluation into advanced IAMD capabilities leveraging all domains, including land, sea, air, and space. These activities should focus on sensor architectures, integrated command and control, interceptors, cruise and hypersonic missile defenses, and area or point defenses. The DOD should urgently pursue deployment of any capabilities that prove feasible. The Secretary of Defense and the Military Departments transfer operations and sustainment responsibility for missile defense to the appropriate Military Departments by 1 October 2024. This will allow the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to focus on research, development, prototyping and testing. ALLIES AND PARTNERS The Commission believes it is in the U.S. national interest to maintain, strengthen, and when appropriate, expand its network of alliances and partnerships. These relationships strengthen American security by deterring aggression regionally, before it can reach the U.S. homeland, while also enabling U.S. economic prosperity through access to international markets. Withdrawing from U.S. alliances and partnerships would directly benefit adversaries, invite aggression that the United States might later have to reverse, and ultimately decrease American, allied, and partner security and economic prosperity. Further, the Commission believes that our defense and the defense of the current international order is strengthened when Allies can directly contribute to the broader strategic posture, and the United States should seek to incorporate those contributions as much as possible. The Executive branch should recognize that any major change to U.S. strategic posture, policies, or capabilities will have great effect on Allies’ perceptions and their deterrence and assurance requirements. As a result, any changes should be predicated on meaningful consultations. RISK REDUCTION The Commission believes it is of paramount importance for the United States to work to reduce strategic risks. This involves activities and programs across the U.S. government, including in nonproliferation and arms control, as well as maintaining strong, viable, and resilient military forces. The Commission recommends that a strategy to address the two-nuclear-peer threat environment be a prerequisite for developing U.S. nuclear arms control limits for the 2027-2035 timeframe. The Commission recommends that once a strategy and its related force requirements are established, the U.S. government determine whether and how nuclear arms control limits continue to enhance U.S. security. The Commission recommends that the United States continue to explore nuclear arms control opportunities and conduct research into potential verification technologies in order to support or enable future negotiations in the U.S. national interest that seek to limit all nuclear weapon types, should the geopolitical environment change. Where formal nuclear arms control agreements are not possible, the Commission recommends pursuing nuclear risk reduction measures to increase predictability and reduce uncertainty and the chances for misperception and miscalculation. The 2009 Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States reported that the United States was at “a moment of opportunity, . . .but also a moment of urgency” – because the security environment had improved and the threat of nuclear proliferation was the principal concern. Since 2009, the security environment has dramatically worsened and new existential threats have emerged. This Commission concludes that the United States now faces a highstakes challenge that requires urgent action. Nevertheless, the Commission has not seen the U.S. government demonstrate the urgency and creativity required to meet the challenge. Nothing other than synchronized steps taken by the Executive and Legislative Branches will craft the strategy and build the posture the nation requires. The challenges are unmistakable; the problems are urgent; the steps are needed now. Photo: An Air Force Global Strike Command unarmed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile launches during a test at Vandenberg Space Force Base (DoD)