New York Criminal Attorney Blog
On July 10, 2025, New York’s Third Department overturned a first-degree kidnapping conviction in People v Akins because the trial judge refused to instruct jurors on the lesser offense of unlawful imprisonment. That ruling matters to you because it shows how a single procedural error can erase the harshest charge on appeal. Understanding the court’s reasoning equips you to spot similar openings in your own case.
When prosecutors alleged the victim remained restrained for more than twelve hours, they triggered the heightened penalties that come with first-degree kidnapping. Trial testimony, however, left room to doubt the length of confinement. By blocking an unlawful-imprisonment option, the judge forced jurors into an all-or-nothing choice. Appellate judges stepped in and ordered a new trial on the kidnapping count, leaving lesser convictions intact. That result proves appellate courts will act when trial judges restrict a jury’s options without legal justification.
How Lesser-Included Offenses Shape Trial Strategy
New York permits jurors to consider lesser-included offenses when two conditions exist: the lesser crime sits entirely inside the greater crime, and evidence would let jurors find the lesser offense without the greater. Kidnapping and unlawful imprisonment meet that test because you cannot commit first-degree kidnapping without first unlawfully restraining someone. A sound trial strategy therefore demands a written request for the lesser instruction whenever the proof raises doubt about a key element—here, the twelve-hour duration.
If you fail to request the charge, you waive the argument. If you request it but do not object when the judge refuses, you weaken any appeal. The defense team in Akins ticked every procedural box, preserving the issue and winning a partial victory long after the verdict. That sequence reminds you that meticulous motion practice, precise objections, and a clean record can pay dividends even when jurors return with guilty findings.
Protecting Your Case with Precise Timelines
Timeline disputes often decide whether a jury sees a lesser-included option. You can strengthen that part of your defense by acting quickly:
-
Gather hard evidence: Collect cell-phone pings, receipts, ride-share logs, and security footage that mark your location by time.
-
Interview witnesses early: Statements captured soon after an event carry more weight because memories fade.
-
Retain technical experts: Digital-forensics professionals and medical specialists can undercut the prosecution’s timeline.
Each of these steps guards against prosecutors stretching facts to fit a higher charge. When the evidence suggests multiple interpretations, you arm your lawyer with material to demand a lesser-included instruction. Maintaining a detailed, credible timeline eases negotiations and sets the stage for meaningful appellate review.
A disciplined approach to timing evidence does more than reduce exposure; it forces the State to confront reasonable doubt at trial, which can motivate plea discussions on terms you control.
Using Jury Instructions to Pressure Prosecutors
Jury-instruction battles often happen outside the jury’s presence, yet they influence every offer on the table. Prosecutors know that a well-supported lesser-included request slices away leverage: jurors uncomfortable with severe penalties gain a safer outlet. When the prosecution grasps that risk, it may soften its stance.
Your attorney should submit draft instructions that quote the leading cases and track the relevant Criminal Jury Instructions (CJI). A judge who sees a polished, legally precise request is more likely to grant it. Even if the court refuses, that record fortifies an appeal similar to the one that succeeded in Akins. You benefit either way—through a better plea offer before verdict or a viable appellate issue after.
Effective jury-instruction advocacy therefore doubles as both offensive and defensive strategy, shaping outcomes in and out of the courtroom.
Act Early to Preserve Every Right
Critical deadlines arrive quickly after arrest. Statutory speedy-trial clocks start running under Criminal Procedure Law § 30.30, discovery motions carry ten-day windows, and suppression challenges must appear in writing before trial. Missing one deadline can strip away defenses you did not know existed. When you retain counsel immediately, you ensure timely filings, protect your right to complete evidence, and guard against lost procedural advantages.
Prompt legal action also deters the State from last-minute surprises. Prosecutors aware of a vigilant defense team tend to produce essential discovery sooner, minimizing the risk of forced adjournments that eat into your 30.30 time. Early engagement preserves leverage today and safeguards appellate options tomorrow.
Your Next Move Toward a Stronger Defense
People v Akins highlights the power of lesser-included offenses, meticulous record-making, and swift action. If you or someone you care about faces serious felony charges, you cannot rely on the court to fix every error after the fact. You need a plan that starts the moment police knock on the door and continues through verdict and beyond.
Talk with Tilem & Associates, P.C. Today
Do not wait for trial mistakes to dictate your future. Call Tilem & Associates, P.C. at 877-377-8666 right now. An attorney will review your timeline, craft targeted motions, and press for every instruction that protects your freedom. Take control of your defense today, and give yourself the strongest chance for a second chance tomorrow.