Results

 

While no two cases are identical, and no result can be guaranteed, Mr. Bazile firmly believes that actions, and results speak louder than words. The following are a sampling of recent results obtained by Pierre Bazile Esq., in Courts throughout New York State.

 

2024 - People ex rel. Bazile v. Toulon

226 A.D.3d 1068, 209 N.Y.S.3d 565

 

App. Div. 2024 - People ex rel. Bazile v. Toulon

212 N.Y.S.3d 821

 

May 2023 - People v. FJ Suffolk County

Weapons Possession charges: Defendant facing 32 ½ years incarceration plead down to 3-year term after serious evidentiary anomalies exposed during pre-trial proceedings.

 

September 2023 - People v. RS Nassau County

DWI charge. Not guilty verdict after bench trial, Jury deliberated 17 minutes.

 

October 2023 - People v AD

Suffolk County Assault Charges : Case dismissed after exposing serious procedural failure by the prosecution, warranting dismissal of all charges.

 

December 2023 - People v. MM Suffolk County

Assault Charge: charges dismissed mid trial when evidence adduced during cross examination of complainant revealed that complainant perjured himself, tampered with evidence, and tampered with other prosecution witnesses.

 

N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023 - People v. Davis

82 Misc. 3d 1243(A), 209 N.Y.S.3d 725

 

N.Y. Dist. Ct. 2022 - People v. Gundy

75 Misc. 3d 1227(A), 171 N.Y.S.3d 829

 

2021 - People ex rel. Bazile v. Schiraldi,

195 A.D.3d 667, 144 N.Y.S.3d 868

 

N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2020 - People v. Catapano

70 Misc. 3d 566, 136 N.Y.S.3d 658

 

November 2020 - People v. CC: Suffolk County

Aggravated harassment charge: Charge dismissed after exposing serious procedural failure by the prosecution, warranting dismissal of all charges.

 

January 2020 - People v. FM: Nassau County

DWI charge. Not guilty verdict after bench trial.

 

November 2019 - People v. JH: Bronx County

13 count indictment alleging unlawful possession of firearms and marijuana, and ammunition. Not guilty after trial on all counts.

 

August 2018 - People v. RA: Suffolk County

Domestic violence charges dismissed mid trial when evidence adduced during cross examination of complainant revealed that the crime charged did not fact occur.

 

June 2018 - People v. DJB: Suffolk County

Menacing and weapon charge. Not guilty verdict obtained with Jury deliberating for 18 minutes and 38 seconds.

 

September 2017 - People v. "EJ" Nassau County

DWI trial in Nassau County yielded a Not Guilty verdict after 50 minutes of deliberation.

 

March 2016 - People v. "PG" Orange County

After trial, with defendant facing 15 years on a class C felony gun charge, with the jury deadlocked 8-4 in favor of acquittal after 4 days of deliberation, was able to secure a plea bargain to a class E felony, carrying only 1-3 years.

 

September 2014 - People v. "AR" Suffolk County

14 count indictment, after trial the Defendant was acquitted of all felony counts.

 

May 2014 - People v. "SC" Suffolk County

Defendant charged with 3rd degree assault. All charges dismissed after investigation revealed that the people’s case was impossible to prove.

 

October 2013. People v. “VE” Suffolk County

Criminal Obstruction of breathing charge dismissed after exposing fatal and material procedural defects in the people's case.

 

June 2013 People v. “KW” Nassau County

Domestic Violence assault allegation. Verdict of "Not Guilty" after 39 minutes of deliberation.

 

June 2013 People v. “AL” Suffolk County

Suffolk County restaurant owner charged with striking an unruly Parton with a tray. Verdict of "Not Guilty" obtained after trial by demonstrating the unruly patron was engaged in an act of Criminal Trespass at the time of incident, and the restaurateur’s actions were justifiable self- defense.

 

February 2013 People v. “NFD” Suffolk County

Domestic Violence case, where defendant was accused of sending a threatening offensive message in violation of an order of protection. After demonstrating to the people how I intended to show that their complainant sent the offensive message to herself, and made it look like it had been sent by the defendant, the people promptly dismissed all charges against the Defendant.

 

January 2013 - People v. "CC" Suffolk County

Youth charged with possession of Marijuana that was actually recovered from the pocket of another youth who was been riding in the same vehicle. When confronted with the fact that the actual possessor of the marijuana had already plead guilty and paid his fines, the people were shown that they could not possibly convict the defendant in this case. Matter adjourned, to be ultimately dismissed.

 

January 2013 - People v. "CM" Suffolk County

High speed summons defeated in Suffolk County by identifying material defects in the summons that rendered it unenforceable.

 

December 2012. People v. “AR” Suffolk County

A particular SCPD police officer stopped the defendant multiple times, over several different dates charging the same questionable violations each time. At trial before the traffic violations adjudication bureau, the defendant was acquitted of each and every charged violation.

 

November 2012 - Case of "DS" Queens County

Queens Real Estate Broker charged a fee to a couple to find an apartment. They paid their fee, and he found them an apartment. The couple changed their minds and demanded the refund of their fee. When the Broker declined to refund the fee, the couple made a complaint for Grand Larceny, and an NYPD detective called "DS", the Broker to tell him that if he didn't refund the fee the detective would "...let his cuffs do the talking." "DS" was advised to inform the detective that he'd be coming to talk to him and bringing an attorney. Upon responding to the precinct with "DS", Mr. Bazile reminded the detective that the Criminal Procedure Law of New York State doesn't authorize police to arrest for civil small claims disputes, and that having served as a police officer; it was clearly not in the purview of the police to engage in private debt collection. As a result, the complaint was closed and referred to small claims court, no crime, no arrest of "DS".

 

June 2012 - People v. "MCF" New York County

"Not Guilty" verdict for a defendant in a felony assault case. Four counts, 4 "Not Guilty" verdicts, after approximately only 45 minutes of deliberation.

 

May 2012 - People v "JPC" Nassau County

Defendant in Nassau County was charged under 2 dockets with DWI and possession of cocaine. Mr. Bazile was able to successfully get the DWI charge pled down to Driving While Impaired (a violation, not a crime) and able to get the cocaine charge dismissed entirely. (Largely because the People would have been ultimately unable to prove that, the substance recovered was actually in fact cocaine.) The defendant had some hefty fines to pay, but he avoided jail, and got a second chance.

 

April 2012 - Case of "VD" & "AT" Kings County

Assault Case in Kings County, Co-Defendants, started as a felony assault. On the day of trial, when confronted with the defendants' readiness to defend their innocence, the prosecutor offered to plead the charge down to Harassment (a Violation, not a Crime) with the penalty being “time served” only. (About 24 hours in the system for each) While a "Not Guilty" verdict was within grasp in this case, because the defendants had a strong self-defense argument, the defendants chose to avoid the uncertainty of trial, and accept the plea to a non-criminal violation. That's the advantage of plea bargains. You get to lessen your exposure to the potentially harsh penalties that could result from a conviction. Each case is different, but generally, if you can get a plea bargain that works for your individual situation, you should give serious thought to accepting it. Mr. Bazile has had many successes in obtaining favorable plea dispositions for his clients.

 

February 2012 - People v. "SB" Queens County

The defendant in this Queens Driving While Intoxicated case, received a plea arrangement, down to Driving While "Impaired" rather than "Intoxicated". Driving while Impaired is a violation grade offense, thus not even a crime. While no two cases are exactly the same, among that factors that often lead to a favorable disposition in such cases are: prior DWI history, lack of accidents or injuries in the case, and BAC reading not very high over the .08 limit. There will still be consequences associated with a violation plea, but overall the result is far better than pleading to a misdemeanor or felony. Call Mr. Bazile, to discuss options, if you or your loved ones have DWI issues to deal with.

 

Case of "IH" & "KB" Queens County

Two 8th graders were suspended from school for a fight, one of them for merely trying to break it up. The School principal suspended everybody in sight, no questions asked, without any consideration of what their roles in the incident were. Mr. Bazile was able to get the child who was breaking up the fight restored to school, and her suspension expunged from her record. The second child, who was actually in the fight, was restored to school after a 10 day suspension. (The Department of Education had been seeking a penalty of 30 days.)

 

August 2011 - People v "JH" Suffolk County

3rd Degree Assault in Suffolk reduced to Harassment (Violation) after the DA had been demanding that the defendant plead to the original charge, and serve 3 years of probation. What the DA didn't know was there was strong evidence that the complaining witness staged the confrontation with the defendant, faked the injury, and provoked the incident so he could manufacture a personal injury lawsuit. When confronted with the reality and evidence that their complainant fabricated injuries in this case, the people were anxious to dispose of the case with a violation, rather than proceed to trial. While a "Not Guilty" verdict was in reach, he defendant chose to avoid the uncertainty of trial, and plead to this minor offense rather than expose himself to potential trial penalties.

 

October 2010 - People v "GG" Nassau County

Defendant charged with Felony Criminal Mischief, Charges reduced to Disorderly Conduct (a violation, not a crime) after the people were shown that the complaining witness was grossly exaggerating the value of the property allegedly damaged, and also being shown that they would be ultimately unable to prove the other elements of the crime.