In an internationally watched case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturned Bill Cosby’s conviction finding that he had been improperly prosecuted after relying on what he believed was a promise of immunity from then District Attorney Bruce Castor which caused Cosby to testify in a civil case brought by one of his victims and make various [...]
In its June 3rd decision, the Supreme Court greatly narrowed the scope of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The CFAA, the main federal anti-hacking law, prohibits outside actors from illegally accessing – breaking into – government or private computer networks. In addition, it is routinely used to charge authorized users of a [...]
Last week’s decision in Carpenter v. United States, a 5-4 decision that the government must obtain a court-authorized warrant for cell site location information (CSLI), is a small step toward recognizing privacy rights in an age of ever-expanding technology. Most people do not realize that their cell phones are capable of tracking their every movement - 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. As we move about, our cell phones ping off of the nearest cell tower. Several times a minute our cell phones contact the nearest cell tower. Our cell providers collect and store that information. Examining that information can reveal a person’s daily movements with a fair degree of accuracy, usually within hundreds of feet to a few miles. Each tower has time-stamped records for every cell phone that pinged off of it, and more specifically, which direction on the tower’s multiple receivers.
The police stop you for an alleged driving infraction – speeding, failure to stay in lane, tinted windows – and while talking with you the officer smells the odor of marijuana. The officer asks you to step out of the car, searches the car and finds drugs. You contact a criminal defense attorney to defend you and explore the possibility of a motion to suppress the search. If you are the driver of a personal vehicle or the owner, you have what is known as an expectation of privacy and “standing” to suppress the search. However, if you are a passenger of the vehicle, or the driver of a rental car that was rented by a friend or family member and you are not listed on the rental agreement, you may lack standing to challenge the search of the vehicle.
On April 4, 2017, New Jersey Supreme Court Chief Justice Stuart Rabner issued an order designating Andrew Olesnycky and 13 other attorneys as Certified Criminal Trial Attorneys. By this order, Mr. Olesnycky joins a small group of New Jersey lawyers -- less than 1% state-wide -- who have demonstrated the experience, knowledge, and dedication to the field of criminal law necessary to earn the designation of Certified Criminal Trial Attorney.
In 2016, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued two opinions of particular importance for attorneys who regularly handle criminal domestic violence cases in New Jersey. In State v. Bryant, decided on November 10, 2016, the Court suppressed evidence found during a protective sweep search of a home after a 911 call reporting a crime of domestic violence. The opinion is extremely important for any defendant who has been charged with a crime based upon evidence uncovered during a police response to a domestic violence call.