Skip to main content

DISTRICT ATTORNEY VANCE ANNOUNCES INDICTMENT IN EAST HARLEM SHOOTING

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., today announced the indictment of MIGUEL PADILLA, 44, in Manhattan Supreme Court for firing a weapon multiple times in East Harlem with the intent to kill. PADILLA is charged with Attempted Murder in the Second Degree, Attempted Assault in the First Degree and Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, among other charges.[1]

"Using an illegal gun, the defendant committed a violent and reckless act that brought harm to an innocent child," said District Attorney Vance. "The widespread availability of illegal firearms makes it all too easy for a situation to escalate into violence. We cannot rest in our fight against the proliferation of illegal guns on our streets."

According to documents filed in court and statements made on the record in court, on January 1, 2011, following a dispute over a parking space, PADILLA allegedly shot a semiautomatic pistol several times at a man driving a Chevy Impala along East 107th Street with his wife and four-year-old child inside the vehicle. The shots did not strike the intended victim, however, and instead struck a 13-year-old boy who was a passenger in minivan parked near the Impala. The gunshots shattered the rear window of the minivan and grazed the victim's head. He was treated and released from a hospital, and is expected to make a full recovery.

Assistant District Attorney Andrew Searle is handling the prosecution of the case under the supervision of Assistant District Attorney William Mahoney, Chief of Trial Bureau 60; Assistant District Attorney John Wolfstaetter, Co-Chief of the Vehicular Crimes Unit; and Executive Assistant District Attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo, Chief of the Trial Division. NYPD Sergeant Kristine Gosling and Detectives David Broadwell, Antonio Rivera, Michael Haverty, Thomas Fischer, Felix Cruz, and Rafael Munoz assisted in the investigation.

Defendant Information:

MIGUEL PADILLA, D.O.B. 11/2/1966
Bronx, NY

Charges:

Attempted Murder in the Second Degree, a class B felony, one count
Attempted Assault in the First Degree, a class C felony, one count
Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, a class C felony, two counts
Assault in the Second Degree, a class D felony, one count
Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Third Degree, a class D felony, one count
Reckless Endangerment in the First Degree, a class D felony, one count

A class B felony is punishable by up to 25 years in prison, a class C felony is punishable by up to 15 years in prison, and a class D felony is punishable by up to 7 years in prison.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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.
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
3 comments
Read more

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more