Q: Can prior undocumented crimes affect current charges?

A: It depends on whether the admissions were taken in violation of his Miranda rights. I would need to know all the facts and circumstances of how he came to be interviewed and whether he was in custody and whether he waived his Miranda rights. But assuming the statements were legally taken, then of course they can investigate and potentially charge him for other crimes if they have independent sources of evidence because a defendant can’t be convicted based upon his statement alone, the admission must be corroborated by other evidence.

A: This is an important question, especially when it involves serious felony charges. In New York, a person cannot be formally charged or sentenced for prior crimes unless those acts are separately prosecuted or admitted under oath during a court proceeding. However, prior undocumented or uncharged criminal acts may still influence the way a current case is handled at different stages, such as investigation, plea negotiations, and sentencing.

If Peter admitted to committing multiple similar offenses after being arrested for assaulting and robbing a pizza delivery person, those statements can be relevant even though the prior acts were not reported or prosecuted. While his admission alone may not increase the statutory level of the charges he currently faces, prosecutors could use that information to argue that he has a pattern of behavior that poses a continued threat to public safety. This could affect how aggressively they prosecute the current case and whether they seek the highest possible sentence.

Peter is currently facing charges of Gang Assault in the Second Degree under Penal Law § 120.06 and Robbery in the First Degree under Penal Law § 160.15. Both are violent felonies, and both carry significant penalties, including potential state prison time. His admissions to similar prior acts could influence how prosecutors approach plea negotiations, possibly resulting in fewer or no offers of leniency. Additionally, if convicted, a judge may consider those admissions during sentencing as aggravating factors that warrant a harsher penalty.

While evidence of uncharged prior acts is generally not admissible at trial to show a defendant's criminal character, it may be introduced for specific purposes under New York’s evidentiary rules. If the prior acts are sufficiently similar and relevant to show intent, motive, identity, or a common scheme or plan, the court might permit their limited use. This is often referred to as a Molineux exception, named after a New York case that established the rule.

Overall, even though Peter may not face new charges for the prior crimes unless law enforcement pursues them separately, his admissions could significantly affect how his current case unfolds. He should consult with an experienced New York criminal defense attorney as soon as possible to protect his rights and determine how best to address the impact of those statements.

This response is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalized guidance, please consult a qualified criminal defense attorney licensed in New York.