Jonathan Gonzales-Alvarez Convicted by Jury for Murdering Bar Employee

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the conviction of JONATHAN GONZALES-ALVAREZ, 23, for fatally stabbing a security guard at a restaurant and bar in Washington Heights after the bar’s employees asked him to quiet down. A jury in New York State Supreme Court found GONZALES-ALVAREZ guilty of all of the charges in the indictment: Murder in the Second Degree and Gang Assault in the First Degree. The defendant will be sentenced on February 15, 2012.

“A father of two young boys lost his life merely because he asked the defendant to quiet down at a bar,” said District Attorney Vance. “I thank the jurors for their service in this case.”

As proven at trial, on October 27, 2009, GONZALES-ALVAREZ was at La Casa Del Mofongo, a bar in Washington Heights that was hosting a late night karaoke and dance contest. When GONZALES-ALVAREZ became rowdy, the bar’s employees asked him to quiet down. GONZALES-ALVAREZ then punched the bar’s security guard, Arsene Epouta, in the face and stabbed him with a switchblade multiple times in the back, right thigh, abdomen, and heart. Epouta was later pronounced dead at New York Presbyterian Hospital.

A separately charged defendant, LUIS ALMANZAR, 23, is facing manslaughter charges in a pending case.

Assistant District Attorneys Jeffrey Levinson and Amy Sharpe prosecuted the case, under the supervision of Assistant District Attorney Warren Murray, Chief of Trial Bureau 50.

Defendant Information:

JONATHAN GONZALES-ALVAREZ, D.O.B. 3/1/1988
Bronx, NY

Convicted:
• Murder in the Second Degree, a class A felony, 1 count
• Gang Assault in the First Degree, a class B felony, 1 count

Comments

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 ...

New York Paralegal Blog

Search This Blog