Rumors about Chase Scanlan, wearer of the fabled #22 on the Syracuse Men's Lacrosse Team, have been swirling around social media in the last few weeks. We now have a pretty good handle on the allegations, and why the school suspended, then unsuspended, and now resuspended Scanlan. An investigation by the Syracuse Police Department and Onondaga County District Attorney culminated yesterday in the charging and arrest of Scanlan, as well as a release of the specific allegations which have landed the lacrosse player in legal jeopardy. Orange::44 used to do a lot of legal posts back in the day, when the major sports programs within Syracuse Athletics used to have regular legal drama. Thankfully, it's been a while. A long while. But here we are. As recounted in great detail in a very comprehensive article by Douglass Dowty on Syracuse.com, Scanlan is charged with Criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree (a Class A misdemeanor) and Harassment in the Second Degree (a violation). On Friday, May 7, 2021, Scanlan was arrested, brought through the booking process, held for several hours in jail at the Onondaga Justice Center, arraigned by a judge, and released pending further proceedings. There's a lot there, so let's break it down. Scanlan was arrested because relevant witnesses came forward to give sworn statements to the police, which gave the police/DA the factual basis necessary to determine which charges were appropriate. Once those charges were filed, the police had a legal basis to arrest him. When someone is arrested, they are brought through the booking process -- the police gather pedigree information about the defendant, obtain fingerprints and a photograph, and all of that information is entered into a database along with information about the pending charges. For charges like this where the law does not allow for bail to be set, a defendant would typically be given an appearance ticket and simply sent home with direction to appear in court at a later date. However, given this was a domestic violence case, he needed to be held pending arraignment before a judge, so that the court could issue a temporary order of protection in favor of the complainant. Down here in Chemung County where I work, a judge would have been immediately available for an arraignment, but I guess Onondaga County does things a little differently, and Scanlan was held in custody for several hours before appearing before a judge for arraignment. At the arraignment, Scanlan would have been provided a copy of the charges against him, advised of his rights, served with that temporary order of protection, and then released on his own recognizance with a promise to appear at a later date. The two charges are Criminal Mischief and Harassment. Criminal Mischief is intentionally damaging property belonging to someone else with no permission to do so. Here, Scanlan is alleged to have damaged the complainant's iPhone by dropping it in a toilet, and later throwing it to the ground, breaking the glass face of the phone. Misdemeanor level Criminal Mischief is charged when the damages to the property are not specified in an amount; when damages exceed $250, then the charge could be bumped up to a felony. Most of us have experienced broken phones, so Scanlan got lucky that he wasn't charged with a felony. If convicted, this misdemeanor charge carries a jail term of up to 364 days, or probation up to three years, or simply a one-year conditional discharge. The Harassment charge is a violation (a non-criminal offense), where, with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm, a person strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects such other person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same. The Syracuse.com article explains that the allegations involve Scanlan pushing a woman and, later, holding her down on his bed with a forceful squeeze which ultimately led to bruising her ribs. The police and District Attorney decided they did not have enough evidence to charge misdemeanor assault -- which would require proof of physical injury -- surmising that lingering pain and bruised ribs doesn't meet that legal standard (when, actually, I think probably does). It's not a slam dunk on physical injury, particularly if the victim didn't describe the pain as "substantial," so I guess the close call here went in favor of the accused -- and there's certainly ample evidence to charge Harassment. Harassment carries up to 15 days in jail, or a conditional discharge. Both charges here also carry mandatory surcharges and possible fines. A Criminal Mischief conviction will also result in Scanlan being required to submit his DNA for inclusion into the New York State DNA Databank, so it will be on file forever. When this incident was initially investigated by Syracuse Public Safety (essentially the university police), Scanlan was suspended by the school. However, when criminal charges were not immediately forthcoming, he was reinstated. We've seen much surmising by people that the reinstatement was due to potential liability the school had under Title IX -- essentially that Scanlan might be able to sue the school for lack of due process in his suspension. We won't know for sure because of the privacy protections under federal law, but this seems likely given what we know now -- and the fact that now that criminal charges are pending, Scanlan has been removed from athletic participation. It's frustrating as fans that we didn't quite know what was going on between the initial suspension and the reinstatement. To a large degree, the school's hands were tied, but the messaging probably could have been better. Nobody likes that head coach John Desko said the reinstatement was his call (it no doubt wasn't) but I think the school couldn't really say why there was a suspension in the first place, or why it had to reinstate him (Editor's Note: I believe the Syracuse Unviersity General Counsel was directing much of the advise during this part of the process to the Athletic Department and likely dictated what information to release and at what time to attempt to avoid any liability on the part of the school. Title IX protection is serious and due to the domestic nature of this incident, certain protections are built in for the accused.). But we know for sure now that he can't participate in athletics now that he's been charged. Over the next several weeks, the DA will have to turn over what's called discovery to Scanlan's defense attorney -- things like police reports, witness statements, pictures, video, medical records, basically anything of relevant evidentiary value. His attorney could file certain motions to challenge evidence or even the legal sufficiency of the charges themselves. No doubt there will also be discussions between the ADA and defense attorney about a resolution to the case -- either a plea bargain or possibly a deferred disposition through a diversion program which could ultimately lead to a dismissal. That could require something like community service, alcohol counseling, and/or domestic violence counseling. That's what I would push for if I was Scanlan's attorney, particularly if he has no criminal record and we want to preserve that. However, the ADA on the case will have to weigh that against the interests of the victim in protecting her and making it known to the community that domestic violence is serious and will be dealt with accordingly. Each case is different, and those involved will have to determine what meets the ends of justice. Scanlan is presumed innocent. There may appear to be a great deal of evidence against him, but that presumption of innocence exists unless and until either Scanlan pleads guilty, or a jury unanimously finds him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We should never lose sight of that cornerstone of our legal system. However, Syracuse University and the Athetics Department can and has taken action solely based upon the criminal charges pending, and my guess is that we'll never see Scanlan wearing #22 at Syracuse again.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Lacrosse, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Lacrosse

I miss Joel McHale's "The Soup" with the "Gavel Bangin'" segment

It's been a while since we've posted a lawdog article here on Orange::44. Last February, to be exact. And that was regarding the self-imposed postseason ban for the basketball team. The last lawdog article about SU Athletes being involved in a crime was October 30, 2013, when Ryan Norton was arrested on Marshall Street during the football team's bye week. By and large, Syracuse student-athletes have kept it clean since then, which has been a welcomed relief for Brian and I so we can focus on writing about sports instead of crime. But, here we are.

The dot com is reporting that former Syracuse DB Naesean Howard was charged Saturday with Assault in the Second Degree and Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Fourth Degree stemming from a stabbing incident on campus. Today, we learned that not only were the victims SU students, but they are members of the football team -- defensive backs Chauncey Scissum and Corey Winfield. Neither are reported to have life-threatening injuries, which is the good news. However, their exact status and how that will factor into their ability to play this fall remains to be seen, so please keep Chauncey and Corey in your thoughts and prayers for a speedy recovery.

As for the suspect, Naesean Howard, he had been making a pitch to be able to walk on to the football team this fall, after having been dismissed from the team in 2014 by former head coach Scott Shafer, leaving school, and then reenrolling at Syracuse this year. The school has indefinitely suspended Howard, so I think it's safe to assume -- especially given that the victims are members of the football team who figured to be starters this fall -- that new head coach Dino Babers won't be looking to allow Howard to walk on, even if he somehow remains in school once this case works itself through.

What can Howard expect, from the legal perspective? Well, as of this writing, he's in the Onondaga County Justice Center. If he hasn't been arraigned, I'm sure that will happen Monday morning, bail will be set, he'll have a lawyer, and a preliminary hearing will be scheduled. He's charged with a felony and a misdemeanor -- Assault being a Class D violent felony, and the weapons charge being a Class A misdemeanor. On the felony charge, Syracuse City Court has limited jurisdiction, so it only has the legal ability to set bail and to hold a preliminary hearing to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to continue Howard held on bail pending a presentation of his case to the Grand Jury.

With the assault charge being the more serious of the charges, what happens on that charge will likely control what ultimately happens in this case. If convicted, Howard could face up to seven years in prison. However, there is no mandatory state prison sentence, though because some incarceration is mandatory, he could receive a local jail sentence (and the time he's in right now would count towards that). He could also receive probation along with whatever jail sentence he receives (up to six months).

If I'm Howard's defense attorney, I'm investigating the circumstances in which this stabbing occurred. What other people were around during the incident? Was there an argument or fight that occurred? Did either of the players who were stabbed possess any type of a weapon? Did Howard act in self defense? As more details about this incident are released, we'll get a better sense of what direction the legal case will take.

In the meantime, let's hope Chauncey & Corey have a full and speedy recovery.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Football

Well, we made it until the end of October.

News surfaced today that Syracuse starting kicker Ryan Norton is suspended for the Wake Forest game this Saturday due to an arrest last weekend. Norton had been the starter since Ross Krautman was lost for the season due to injury/surgery.

Norton's arrest stems from allegations of underage possession of alcohol and resisting arrest. Evidently, Norton was outside of Acropolis on Marshall Street last Friday night (strike 1), possessing a 24-ounce can of Bud Light (strike 2). When approached by police, he initially complied but then tried to run away, and struggled when they apprehended him (strike 3).

Now, in my experience as a defense attorney, police do have a tendency to over-exaggerate allegations of resisting arrest. But my guess is Norton acted stupid enough to warrant these charges. I say stupid because if he's cooperative with police about the underage drinking, maybe he just walks away from this. Maybe they cops just say "Throw away the beer and go home." Or, at worst, he gets cited for underage drinking -- a simple violation -- which would send him to Syracuse Community Court, he'd have the option to perform community service, and have the charge be dismissed. Instead, he complicated things by resisting.

Complicated, because resisting arrest is a misdemeanor. A crime. If he's found guilty of resisting arrest, he gets a criminal record. It becomes more difficult to dispose of the case.

While a conviction of resisting arrest carries a maximum of one year in jail or three years probation, I certainly don't see either of those things happening here. In fact, I don't see him being convicted of resisting arrest. Assuming he has no criminal history, I think at worst he pleads down to disorderly conduct & pays a fine, or at best performs community service and gets everything dismissed.

We'll let the court process play itself out. In the meantime, Head Coach Scott Shafer has already decided that this is a violation of team rules, that Norton will be suspended for one game (Wake Forest this Saturday), and will rejoin the team for the game at Maryland next week.

So to recap, a few things from this: football players need to not be idiots when they're not playing football; and to his detriment he made his own situation worse by resisting. Not smart. None of this was smart. Especially the "hanging out in front of Acropolis on a Friday night" part.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Football, Orange44 Lawdogs

Syracuse Athletics: It's always something, isn't it?

As has been widely reported in the Syracuse area, SU's former media director Roger Springfield appeared this morning in Onondaga County Court to be arraigned on an indictment charging him with felony unlawful surveillance. The indictment follows a month-long investigation by Syracuse Police and the Onondaga District Attorney's Office, in response to a disclosure directly from Syracuse University upon its discovery of some videotape evidence that seemed inappropriate. As is the tradition on this blog, we'll break down what the charge means, possible outcomes of the case, and the potential fallout for the Athletic Department.

Springfield, whose real name is evidently Roger Cahak, is charged with Unlawful Surveillance in the Second Degree, which in New York is a Class E felony. The crime is relatively new, becoming law in 2003 -- in response to evolving technology and the privacy concerns that follow. There are four potential theories upon which a person could be guilty of the crime, and based on reports I've seen at this point, it's unclear which of the four Springfield faces.

One theory is that when one acts for his own (or another's) amusement, entertainment, or profit, or to abuse or degrade a person, he intentionally uses an imaging device to secretly view, record, or broadcast a person dressing or undressing or shows his intimate parts at a time or place where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without the person's consent.

The next theory is when one acts for his own (or another's) sexual gratification, he intentionally uses an imaging device to secretly view, record, or broadcast a person dressing or undressing or shows his intimate parts at a time or place where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without the person's consent.

The third theory is when one acts with no legitimate purpose in using an imaging device to secretly view, record or broadcast a person in a bedroom, changing room, fitting room, restroom, toilet, bathroom, washroom, shower, or any room assigned to patrons or guests in a hotel, motel, or inn, without such person's knowledge or consent.

The final theory is when one acts to use an imaging device to secretly view, record, or broadcast, under the clothing being worn by the person, the sexual or other intimate parts of a person (i.e. "upskirting").

I could pretty certainly assume that theory number four doesn't apply here. So from there, the questions we will need to deal with include what Springfield's intent was, and whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a college locker room. In the case of theory three, we know the "prohibited areas" or surveillance -- they're spelled out in the statute -- and the defendant charged under that theory would have to rebut the presuption that he acted with no legitimate purpose. In those instances, surveillance for crime or theft could be a legitimate purpose depending on the circumstances and the notice given to people entering those areas.

Whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a college locker room seems to be an area of focus in this case, according to a statement made by Springfield's attorney. A quick search of NY cases doesn't turn up much concerning a reasonable expectation of privacy in locker rooms, so I'm not so sure why Springfield's attorney feels so confident. The way I see it, if I'm an athlete I have -- if nothing else -- an expectation that the only people who can see me change are my teammates, and maybe my coaches. A locker room is a large changing room -- with doors, no windows to the outside, and limited access. The people in the locker room are all in the same boat -- all exposed to each other, but only to each other. If that expectation did not exist, then the locker room itself would not exist -- the football players would take their pads and jock straps off right at the 50 yard line of Ernie Davis Legends Field, while the ESPN cameras are still rolling and the crowd is filing out the revolving doors.

And, of course, that's absurd.

And so, I have a feeling that Roger Springfield doesn't have much of a case. As an E felony, he faces a maximum of 4 years in state prison; however, he could get local jail time, or even probation. Possibly more damaging, however, is the possibility that a conviction for unlawful surveillance could require Springfield to register as a sex offender under New York's Sex Offender Registration Act.

To his credit, it appears Springfield fully cooperated with the investigation, and even provided additional evidence to the authorities. I'm still trying to get my head around that. So, assuming he has no criminal history, it seems likely that he'll escape having to serve any state prison or even local jail time. His attorney could even make a motion with the Court for this to not be treated as a sex offense, if the facts and circumstances of this case and of Springfield himself would make treatment as a sex offender unduly harsh to him.

While New York does its prosecution, it seems that other jurisdictions may not get involved. There are allegations that some of the surveillance could have occurred in Florida, but Florida seems content in letting New York deal with this. The possibility still exists that the Feds could get involved.

Today was merely the first step in the criminal process. Springfield was arraigned on the felony indictment handed up by the Grand Jury; he appeared in court, was apprised of the charges against him and had his rights explained to him, and the case now moves on to discovery and motions, as well as plea bargaining discussions between Springfield's attorney and the District Attorney's Office. Best case scenario, he gets probation with no sex offender registration. I guess time will tell.

I will say this: Syracuse University seems to have done everything right in this case. As evidenced in its official press release, SU discovered the problem, immediately reported it to authorities, and fully cooperated in the investigation. It also acted quickly in suspending, and then firing, Springfield. There was no cover-up, no referral to a law firm to investigate. So, you know, we've all learned a lot from the Bernie Fine thing.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Orange44 Lawdogs, Roger Springfield

Labels: Breaking The Law, Football, Orange44 Lawdogs

Labels: Breaking The Law, Midnight Madness, Orange Madness, Syracuse Basketball

On a day when all the buzz at the Hill was supposed to be over the good news of Dejuan Coleman committing to play basketball for Syracuse University, our attention is now focused on a current student-athlete finding himself in trouble. The Post-Standard reports that lacrosse player Kevin Drew was arrested early yesterday morning on numerous charges, including Driving While Intoxicated, Resisting Arrest, and other traffic infractions. As we've done in the past, Orange::44 breaks down the charges and what legal ramifications to expect.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Lacrosse

Summer hiatus was going great until Marcus Sales had to go do something really, really stupid.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Football

I won't apologize for the "lazy blogger" headline, because it gives me the opportunity to make you click here and take a listen. Or, for a good laugh, open this video in a new window/tab and have it play while you read this article. Go ahead, I'll wait. OK. Good? Let's get into this.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Josh Wright, Syracuse Basketball

The Syracuse Post-Standard is reporting that Fab Melo appeared in Syracuse City Court today to be arraigned on a charge of 4th Degree Criminal Mischief. He was released after appearing in court, having an order of protection issued against him in favor of the complaining witness, and his case was adjourned to Domestic Violence Court.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Basketball

Rochester's Channel 13 WHAM is reporting today that Ashton Broyld has rejected a plea deal offered to him by prosecutors to resolve the pending charge of public lewdness against him. It appears he had been offered to plead guilty to Exposure of a Person, a violation level offense, in satisfaction of the Public Lewdness charge, a Class B misdemeanor.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Football

Labels: Breaking The Law, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Football

Labels: Breaking The Law, Connvicts, UConn

Three counts of burglary. What does that mean?

It means there are three separate burglary charges. He could be charged with different degrees of burglary for the same incident, or it could be multiple incidents. In short, burglary is the unlawful entry or remaining in a building with the intent to commit a crime therein. Essentially that is 3rd degree burglary. The degree is elevated when the building is a residence, or when a weapon/force is used.

What sort of punishment does a burglary charge carry?

For third degree burglary, this is a Class D Felony, carrying a minimum term of 1-3 years in state prison, a maximum of 2-7 years in state prison, with options for simply a year in the local jail, a split sentence of six months in jail with five years probation, or simply five years probation. 2nd degree burglary is a Class C (violent) Felony, carrying a minimum of 3.5 years in state prison and a maximum 15 years in state prison; a period of 2.5-5 years of Post-Release Supervision is also mandatory. For first degree burglary, a Class B (violent) Felony, the mandatory state prison time is 5-25 years, with 2.5-5 years Post-Release Supervision. No matter the degree, any sentence will usually include fines, surcharges, and restitution (if applicable).

What about grand larceny and petit larceny?

Larceny is the stealing of another's property. Petit Larceny generally refers to goods valued under $1000. Grand Larceny, with various exceptions (i.e. credit cards) covers items over $1000. Grand Larceny itself is broken up into various degrees with different sentencing schemes. Grand Larceny is the felony, where state prison time becomes an option.

Cater's bail is set at $150,000/$300,000. That seems quite high. What gives?

It is quite high. Bail is generally supposed to be a method to ensure a defendant appears for all future court appearances. Factors to consider when bail is set include: the severity of the charges; the defendant's ties to the community; the defendant's criminal history; the defendant's past track record of attending court appearances. There are other factors, but these are the main ones. From what we're hearing, Cater had somewhat of a troubled youth (football helped turn his life around); he's from Long Island; and he is accused of burgling (yes, this is a word) more than one residence on more than one date. These were no doubt factors the Court considered in setting bail as it did.

What's the next step in the legal process?

It appears Cater was formally arraigned on these felony complaints and misdemeanor informations on Sunday. If an attorney was not retained, the Court will assign him an attorney. He is entitled to a Preliminary Hearing for the Court to rule on whether reasonable cause exists that Cater committed one or more felonies and should be held in custody pending action by a Grand Jury. The Grand Jury must meet and hear evidence in order to formally charge him with the felonies for which he can be prosecuted -- this is called an indictment. If the Court, after the Preliminary Hearing, holds him in custody for possible Grand Jury action, the Grand Jury then has 45 days to hear his case. If the Grand Jury takes no action by then, he must be released. If a Grand Jury does indeed indict him on one or more felonies, then his case will be transferred to the Onondaga County Court for arraignment, motions, plea negotiations, and possible trial.

The evidence seems to be eye witness reports, and footprints in the snow. He's screwed, right?

In short, quite possibly. Whether it's him or someone else, the fact that footprints in the snow might be the most damning piece of evidence shows us that we're not dealing with a smart criminal. Though, many criminals aren't what we'd call smart. In any event, his defense attorney should be looking at whether he has an alibi (was somewhere else at the time of the crimes), and how reliable the eye witness is. Generally, eye witnesses are horrible. A number of things can go wrong -- the lighting could be bad, the person's memory might not be good, the description can be wrong. That's what I'd be probing as a defense attorney. But, it certainly doesn't help when the police recovered stolen items from your residence.

You were spot on with your prediction of how the Delone Carter case would be resolved. What are your thoughts on this one?

Knowing what I know at this time, I think Cater gets some jail time. Assuming all the stolen property was recovered, I assume he gets the split sentence of six months in jail followed by five years probation. That probation could then be transferred to Suffolk County, where Cater is from. This takes into account his unstellar history as a youth. To be eligible for this sentence, he must not be convicted of burglary in the second degree, which carries mandatory state prison. If the defense lawyer sees the writing on the wall, he (or she) is immediately negotiating with the District Attorney for a plea before the Grand Jury hears the case. He could agree to a Superior Court Information (SCI), instead of a Grand Jury Indictment, to get the case into County Court. If this SCI charges him with 3rd degree Burglary, then that split sentence would be a viable option. This is how I see things shaking out.

These are the most relevant questions I can think of off the top of my head. Anyone with further questions can post them to the comments section and I'll try to get the answers out there. Thanks for stopping by, and be sure to keep checking in at Orange::44 for all the latest developments in this case and the legal interpretations.

Labels: Breaking The Law, Malcolm Cater, Orange44 Lawdogs, Syracuse Football

Labels: Breaking The Law, Connvicts, Football, UConn

Labels: Big East, Breaking The Law, Connvicts, Football, UConn

Labels: Big East, Breaking The Law, Connvicts, Football, UConn

Labels: Basketball, Big East, Breaking The Law, Drinking

Labels: Breaking The Law, Delone Carter, Syracuse Football

Labels: Assault, Big East, Breaking The Law, Football