We have detected that you do not have the Flash 8 player installed.
Please Click Here to download the Flash plugin.
Welcome
At David S. Zapp, Esq. our clients benefit from more than 30 years of experience in criminal defense. Every case is well-researched and carefully reviewed in order to provide each client with a defense strategy suitable to their individual situation. Our goal is to ensure that our clients understand the legal process and are pleased with the outcome of their cases.

We are experienced in all areas of criminal law and specialize in narcotics and money laundering cases. We practice in the New York and New Jersey courts at both the state and federal levels, and advise clients in state and federal courts nationwide. Mr. Zapp is fluent in Spanish and frequently consults with clients in Latin America and Europe.

We are committed to providing our clients with the best legal assistance possible.

Articles

Error for Judge to Presume Guidelines are Reasonable
In United States v. Peguero, No. 07-2306-cr (2d Cir. August 19, 2009), the appellate court vacated a sentence where the district court presumed that the guideline sentence was reasonable by saying, "I have the ability to do justice and depart [or impose] a sentence independently of the Guidelines, but my opinion is that that is reserved for really special situations, and I even then take the Guidelines into serious consideration."

The Problem of the Large Scale Drug Trafficker
Some alleged large scale drug traffickers (LSDT) who are detained believe that if they make a clean breast of all they know and did, they will receive a good plea bargain. This is not so. If the information a LSDT provides is not beneficial to the Government, the Government will not offer the trafficker a good deal. It is as simple as that.

Money Laundering - Hiding money is not laundering money
This article was written by Steve Statsinger for the Second Circuit Blog published by Federal Defenders in New York

United States v. Garcia, No. 08-1621-cr (2d Cir. December 1, 2009)

In Cuellar v. United States, 128 S.Ct. 1994 (2008), the Court held that, for the crime of transportation money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(2)(B)(i), the government must prove more than that the money was hidden during its transportation. Rather, it must prove that the “purpose,” not merely the effect, of the transportation was to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership or control of the money. Thus, the government must prove not just how the money was moved, but why it was moved. The Second Circuit has held that this holding applies equally to “transaction” money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 956(a)(1)(B)(i), which makes it a crime to engage in certain financial transactions, including the transfer or delivery of cash, for those same purposes.

Question & Answer
What do Probation Officers do and why are they important? How many times does a defendant meet with a Probation Officer?

 
Publications