Any 2 bit lawyer can win this case..

I'm not supporting his cheating ways or his reckless behavior, But there a line you don't cross...

SupremeCommander wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:What kind of man has a side chick not even 2 years into his marriage to a hottie and stores an unregistered semi-auto in easy reach at his estranged wife's apartment in Manhattan?

Young and wack, indeed. Two sides and the truth though.

you forgot to mention that his wife is an ivy leaguer pursuing a legal career

True, makes it even a dumber move on Ray's part, not even considering the alleged brandishing. Woman scorned and all that. Allowed himself to become a cautionary tale. Bet sports agents are checking up on their clients having them batten down the hatches.

Just realized that All-Star Weekend was on Valentine's Day this year. Does the League get any backend points on Basketball Wives? Because that is some pretty ironic scheduling.

Got to talking with a woman at a restaurant bar my age — mid-30s. OK, she was hitting on me but I'm taken and actually believe in monogamy, haha. Actually insulted her by mistake because I assumed she was older than me in our conversation. Accomplished good-looking (i.e. *former* dime) professional in her field, but she was obsessed with ballers — type of woman who was average height but didn't want a guy shorter than 6'2" and watches the draft like its the personals column. Dated a baller but cheated on him with another one, got dumped and was still single to her own surprise but certainly not mine. And even though she had it going on in her career, she felt like her life was incomplete.

The whole baller-hottie symbiosis seems like a sad scene from my view in the cheap seats. Could Ray have married this girl taking her to Dallas BBQ?

The Curious Case of Raymond Felton & the Anti-Plaxico Burress Defense: Not All NY PL 265.03 Crimes are Created Equal
http://www.newyorkcriminallawyer-blog.com/2014/02/the-curious-case-of-raymond-felton-the-anti-plaxico-burress-defense-when-pl-26503.html

The Curious Case of Raymond Felton & the Anti-Plaxico Burress Defense: Not All NY PL 265.03 Crimes are Created Equal

Raymond Felton, the New York Knicks point guard arrested for possessing a loaded firearm, is no Plaxico Burress. Sure, both athletes allegedly possessed a loaded gun in Manhattan without a license and face/faced the crime of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree (New York Penal Law 265.03), but not all crimes are created equal. While Burress served his time in prison on the strength of a CPW 2 case, Felton may be able guide himself clear of the top count.

Paxico Burress pleaded guilty after the Manhattan District Attorney's Office leaned on the strict liability section of New York Penal Law 265.03(3). Simply, without a search and seizure type defense to challenge the recovery of the firearm, there was ample evidence (proof beyond a reasonable doubt), that Burress possessed an unregistered and loaded firearm in one of Gotham's many clubs (obviously, not his home). Case closed? Not necessarily, but with limited defenses Burress was forced to mitigate his conduct as best he could to convince Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance to deviate from the mandatory 3.5 year minimum term of incarceration.

While Felton also faces Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree and its 3.5 year minimum, as of the pre arraignment (when one sees a judge for the first time) reports it appears that Felton will face a different crime of PL 265.03(1)(b). Unlike its strict liability brother, PL 265.03(1)(b) is a much more difficult offense for prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

In relevant part, PL 265.03(1)(b) makes it a crime to posses a loaded firearm (regardless of where) and that you have the intent to use that firearm (handgun, revolver, pistol) unlawfully against another person. Here, according to reports, Felton is accused of threatening his wife, Ariane Raymondo-Felton, in their home. At some point, after the alleged threat, Raymondo-Felton removed the firearm from the home and brought it to her divorce attorney who then brought the firearm to a neighboring precinct.

While Burress relied on mitigation and Felton may not have layups for a defense, the latter at least has open looks at the basket. Where shall we begin...

In no particular order:

(1) Did Raymondo-Felton make an immediate "cry" for help at the time or shortly after the alleged incident? Did she call 911? If not, why? Did she advise her doorman or a neighbor? Why did she go to her divorce lawyer (she is a law student and presumably knows her rights or the role of the police). When did she contact her divorce lawyer and why did she not take the firearm to the police (or merely call them and let them know where to get it?). Are there any prior Domestic Incident Reports or evidence of abuse that corroborate ongoing past conduct (it may not be admissible at trial, but is certainly relevant).

(2) Was Raymondo-Felton aware of the firearm in the apartment previously? If so, did she constructively possess it as well? After the alleged incident with her husband, how long did she possess it prior to bringing it to her attorney. Additionally, where did she posses it? Is she now claiming to be a victim in attempt to cleanse her hands of constructive and actual possession on her part?

(3) What corroboration exists that the firearm was loaded at the time of the alleged threat?

(4) As much as we don't want to think that Raymondo-Felton has an alternative motive, it cannot be ignored. Is Raymondo-Felton using this incident as a "chip" in her divorce proceeding? Is this leverage to get Felton to pay more or be more agreeable to his wife's demands? Is she using law enforcement as a "sword" instead of a "shield?" Clearly, there is a ripe avenue for attack.

To those not immersed in criminal law, the above questions may seem harsh and an attempt to victimize Raymondo-Felton further. Yet, any allegation is merely an allegation. It is neither fact nor truth until proven otherwise. Prosecutors, the courts and criminal lawyers cannot merely accept every allegation as gospel. If we did, the recently exonerated Brooklyn "murderers" would still be languishing in prison. Felton, just like you or I, deserves a cloak of innocence. Whether Felton is successful in beating the top charge of Second Degree Criminal Possession of a Weapon, the game is far from over. However, Felton may avoid the same fate as the former Giant's star.

To learn about New York's weapon and gun crimes, follow the links above or go directly to Crotty Saland PCs' New York Weapon Crimes webpage.

Crotty Saland PC is a New York criminal defense firm founded by two former Manhattan prosecutors.

VCoug wrote:

Vmart wrote:The last person with possession of an illegal fire arm was her. Doesn't that make her guilty also.

Possession doesn't mean they physically have it, it means ownership.

Yes I know. But it was in their apartment obviously with her knowledge if that is the case she is as guilty.

I hate his game but feel for him, regardless of how stupid he is.

sealy wrote:Can only read on phone so apologies in advance if this has already been asked, but wouldn't the divorce proceedings benefited the wife more so if she hadn't basically put Felton's contract in jeopardy of being voided?

I hate his game but feel for him, regardless of how stupid he is.