Skip to main content

ATTORNEY GENERAL CUOMO ANNOUNCES ARREST OF FORMER TOWN JUDGE FOR CHARGES INCLUDING GRAND LARCENY AND OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT

ALBANY, NY (August 4, 2009) - Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo today announced criminal charges against a former town judge for using $27,000 in fees and bail money from a court bank account for personal use.

According to the complaint, James Funk, 47, of Hudson, while sitting as a judge of the Stockport Town Court in Columbia County, withdrew funds from the court’s bank account on four occasions in order to pay the taxes and utility bill on the Diamond Street Diner, his Hudson restaurant, and to stave off the foreclosure of his personal residence.

According to the complaint, in one instance, Funk tried to cover his tracks by having an official bank check issued to one of his employees at the diner. Funk later crossed out the employee’s name and substituted it with “National Grid.”

“As pillars of our legal system, judges are sworn to uphold the law and should be held to the highest professional standards. Allegations of criminal acts from the bench will be thoroughly investigated and prosecuted by my office,” said Attorney General Cuomo. “Judges, like all government employees, are not above the law and must never use their official positions for personal gain.”

An audit conducted by the Unified Court System’s Internal Audit Unit found that the money withdrawn by Funk was mostly attributable to bail money held by the Court for pending cases. As judge, Funk was the sole authorized signatory for the court bank account, and was also responsible for collecting, recording, depositing, and distributing fines and fees that are paid to the court.

Funk was charged today in Stuyvesant Town Court with one count of Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, a class D felony; one count of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree, a class E felony; and one count of Official Misconduct, a class A misdemeanor. If convicted, Funk faces up to 7 years in prison and a fine of up to $5,000.

The matter was referred to the Attorney General’s office by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Unified Court System. Attorney General Cuomo thanks the Office of Court Administration, Office of Internal Affairs and the Internal Audit Unit for their assistance with this investigation.

The case is being handled by Assistant Attorney General Nancy Snyder, with the assistance of Investigator Scott Petucci, under the supervision of Ellen Biben, Special Deputy Attorney General for Public Integrity.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...