BROOKLYN, N.Y. — A Kings County judge questioned prosecutors Thursday after a defense attorney argued the District Attorney’s Office unlawfully combined the value of three separate alleged larcenies to elevate the case to a grand larceny charge against a 42-year-old man.
The accused was charged with petty larceny, criminal possession of stolen property, criminal possession of stolen property valued at more than $1,000, and a fourth and most serious charge of grand larceny involving property valued at more than $1,000. He pleaded not guilty to all charges.
His bail was set at $5,000 cash, a $75,000 insured bond and a $10,000 partially secured surety bond.
The accused’s defense attorney, Nora Wallace, said the District Attorney’s Office combined the value of three separate charges to reach an aggregated amount that would qualify as grand larceny, a decision she argued was unlawful because the charges stemmed from separate incidents.
Wallace said the prosecution was essentially “double [dipping]” its charges against her client.
Judge Juan Abreu asked the prosecutor present whether “this was what was happening,” adding that, if so, it would not be allowed.
He said an aggregated value could be considered only if it totaled more than $10,000 and if the accused had engaged in a continuous course of taking from the same place. He gave the example of someone repeatedly stealing from their place of employment.
Because that was not the case and these were separate incidents on different days in June 2026, including June 10 and June 14, with a third incident occurring “between June 10 and June 29,” as the judge read from notes provided by the attorneys, he said the fourth charge would not be applicable.
Judge Abreu also found the notes to be “so poorly written” that, if the accused were to go to trial, he would not be able to testify about them in their current state.
He also asked how the issue remained unresolved, given that it was the accused’s second court appearance. Wallace said she had raised the issue at the accused’s first arraignment, but the judge presiding at that hearing, Judge Natalie Barros, did not consider it to be an issue.
Judge Abreu asked to speak with the prosecutor who had filed the charges, who was not the same prosecutor present in court Thursday.
When the previous prosecutor could not be located, Judge Abreu said he would recall the case later that afternoon.
The case was recalled later that day. A certificate of compliance had not been filed by the prosecution, a conditional plea was pending, a criminal charge was added, and the accused was released on his own recognizance.
The charges were changed to petty larceny as the top charge, criminal possession of stolen property and disorderly conduct for fighting or violent behavior, which was not an arrest charge.
The accused is due back in court Aug. 28, 2026.
