Yes, but only when the defendant makes a false promise to the bank with intent to defraud, which is a secondary crime under the New York State Penal Law § 155.05 (2)(d). In order for the prosecutor to successfully charge a defendant of larceny by false promise, he/she must first have reasonable cause to believe that the larceny was facilitated by a scheme to defraud the bank.

When the defendant obtains property from the bank such as a mortgage loan by means of misrepresentation, the action becomes a crime and the defendant may be charged with scheme to defraud and larceny by false promise.

For many bank fraud cases, state prosecutors commonly implement the charge of larceny by false promise and scheme to defraud because both offenses are umbrella charges that often cover a myriad of actions left out in the New York State Penal Law.

Larceny by false promise is criminal for a wide range of acts; from issuing a bad check to promising high rates of returns to investors when in fact the defendant’s business is failing. As long as the act exploits a victim’s trust in some form to obtain property, the defendant can be criminally charged for larceny by false promise.

If you been investigated or charged for larceny by false promise or scheming to defraud in New York City, then call our office at (212) 577-6677 to get professional legal advice.

An inaccurate entry in a medical record is not only detrimental to the credibility of the chart but it is also a violation of licensing accreditation standards. It is common for errors and omissions within patients’ medical chart in practice, but hospital administrators, the Office of Professional Misconduct (OPMC), Office of Professional Discipline (OPD) or the New York State Board of Education, do not overlook such incidents.

Depending on the seriousness of the case at hand, improper documentation can lead to the lost of one’s job, administrative hearings for license suspension, and/or criminal liabilities.

If the hospital believes that a healthcare provider is falsifying or altering medical records such as predating or backdating his/her signature on the medical chart when in fact on that date, the provider was not present on that day, the hospital can turn the provider in to the New York Sate Department of Health (DOH), and the OPMC for professional misconduct, or the New York City District Attorney’s Office to face criminal penalties.

It is important for health care professionals to know that a medical record should never be altered once a lawsuit has been instituted (in both criminal and civil lawsuits). The provider should be cautious when making new additions to the record once treatment of the patient in question has been completed, since such changes can be interpreted as an alteration to medical record.

Inaccurate documentation of medical records is common in practice, but it is also one of the reasons why health care professionals are so frequently penalized in administrative and sometimes criminal proceedings. When handling matters related to the OPMC, OPD, DOH or the NYS Board of Education, the provider should seek an experienced medical license or criminal defense attorney because he/she might say something that is self-incriminating without knowing.

At Joseph Potashnik & Associates, we have a panel of some of the most skilled New York State criminal defense and medical license defense attorneys specializing in such areas of professional misconduct and healthcare fraud.

If you are being investigated or arrested for falsifying or altering medical records in New York, then call our office at (212) 577-6677 to get professional legal advice.

Fraud against the government is one of the most commonly prosecuted federal white-collar crimes. Usually, the crime involves making false statements under Section 1001 of Title 18, United States Code. To obtain conviction under this statute, the government must prove that the statement or representation actually be false.

Obviously, “false” means something that is not true. The requirement of falsity is crucial. Court cannot convict if the statement is not false, even if it is misleading. Lying or withholding information on a governmental form that needs to be signed “under oath” or under penalty of perjury, is covered by the law.

An interesting question arises where the statement or the government’s question or form requiring an answer is unclear.
Some courts hold that the government is obligated to minimize the possibility of confusion that could make the defendant’s statement factually correct. One defense technique in such cases is to offer evidence that a government form or document was vague and ambiguous.

If you are investigated or prosecuted for making false statements in New York, call our NYC criminal lawyers at 212-577-6677.

Regina DaSilva, treasurer for the Universal Church, a nonprofit organization, was arrested and charged with multiple counts of grand larceny and fraud for scamming two New York State government offices and Signature Bank more than $22 million in fraudulent mortgage loans for her employer.

Between March 2006 and October 2008, DaSilva used the Universal Church’s name to falsely claim to the New York State Supreme Court that their parishioners will vote and possibly approve several pending mortgages from Signature Bank for properties in Brooklyn and Queens, New York. Following DaSilva’s misled information; the New York State Supreme Court judges issued the 11 mortgage loans to DaSilva.

After receiving 11 mortgages totaling $22,107,044 from Signature Bank, DaSilva allegedly tried to register the loans as charitable donations when in fact, such loans were never approved by the parishioners nor issued as charity by Signature Bank.

If convicted, DaSilva faces a maximum penalty of more than 75 years in prison.

Saverio Todaro, owner of SAF Environmental Corp., an EPA certified lead risk assessor and New York State licensed asbestos air sampling technician, pleaded guilty to falsifying hundreds of lead and asbestos inspection and testing reports for locations throughout New York City.

Starting from February 2001, Todaro claimed to have performed lead paint and asbestos clearance testing in New York City residences that have been found by the DOH Lead Program of the HPD Lead Program, to contain hazardous lead-based paint and/or asbestos.

However, Todaro did not actually perform the clearance testing. Instead, he created fake laboratory reports of the dust samples which stated the residences were clear of hazardous lead-paint and asbestos, and safe for occupancy. SAF customers would then submit such fake laboratory reports to DOH and HPD for abatement or remediation.

From February 2004, Todaro’s asbestos investigator certificate has been suspended and was prohibited from performing building inspection for asbestos. But Todaro continued asbestos inspections or claimed to have continued despite his suspension. On some occasions, Todaro claimed to have performed asbestos inspections without doing so and filed ACP-5s falsifying his work.

Todaro pleaded guilty to 5 counts of false statements, 3 counts of mail fraud, and 3 counts of violations of the Toxic Substances Control Act. He currently faces a maximum sentence of 88 years of imprisonment and a maximum fine of $825,000.