Campus Sexual Assault Defense Lawyer New York

A student accused of sexual assault at a New York college or university is often facing more than one process at the same time. One of them is a criminal matter brought under Article 130 of the New York Penal Law and prosecuted in a New York court. The other is an institutional proceeding conducted by the school under its own policy, with its own procedures and its own consequences for enrollment and academic standing. They are separate. Neither one decides the other, and the outcome of one does not settle the other.

An accusation is not proof. In the criminal matter the prosecution must prove every element of the offense it has charged, and under N.Y. Penal Law § 130.05 lack of consent is an element of every Article 130 offense. That statutory frame is where a criminal defense analysis begins, and it is not the same frame a campus body applies when it works through a matter under institutional policy.

Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C. has defended people accused of crimes since 1997. Mr. Sris, Owner and Founder of Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C., is a former prosecutor, and he and the firm’s Of Counsel attorneys treat a campus allegation as what it can become: felony exposure under Article 130, with consequences that reach well past a semester. Early work matters, because an accused student is frequently asked for a written account while an investigation is still open, and an account committed to paper early tends to shape everything that follows it. Request a consultation by calling (888) 437-7747.

On this page

Lack of Consent Under N.Y. Penal Law § 130.05 in the Campus Context

Article 130 of the Penal Law is built around a common element. N.Y. Penal Law § 130.05 provides that lack of consent is an element of every offense in the article, and the statute then describes where lack of consent comes from. It can result from forcible compulsion. It can result from incapacity to consent. It can result from non-acquiescence. For rape in the third degree under subdivisions seven, eight or nine of § 130.25, it can result from a clearly expressed lack of consent. Subdivision 3 of § 130.05 lists the persons deemed incapable of consent, a list that includes those under seventeen.

That structure matters in a campus matter because the word consent is doing different work in each setting. A school applies the meaning its own policy assigns. A New York court applies the meaning § 130.05 assigns. Defense analysis of a criminal charge starts from the statutory definition and asks which route to lack of consent the prosecution is relying on, because each route calls for a different showing and each can be examined on its own terms.

The conduct definitions in N.Y. Penal Law § 130.00 matter for the same reason. New York defines vaginal sexual contact as contact between the penis and the vagina or vulva, with no penetration element, and it defines oral sexual contact and anal sexual contact separately. The older penetration-based term sexual intercourse was deleted from Article 130. An account written in ordinary language, whether by the person who made the report, by a witness, or by the accused student, does not map cleanly onto those statutory terms. Part of the early defense work is understanding what an account actually alleges under the statute rather than what it appears to allege on a first reading.

Charges arising from campus reports are not confined to a single section. Forcible touching under § 130.52 is a class A misdemeanor. Sexual abuse in the first degree under § 130.65 is a class D felony. Rape in the first degree under § 130.35 is a class B felony and a sexually violent offense under Correction Law § 168-a(3).

How Mr. Sris and the Firm’s Of Counsel Attorneys Handle These Cases

Work begins with the accusation as it was actually made, in the words in which it was made. Mr. Sris and the firm’s Of Counsel attorneys read the report, any written statement already in existence, and any charging document, then measure the alleged conduct against the text of Article 130 to identify which section the facts are being pressed toward and which route to lack of consent under § 130.05 the prosecution would need to establish.

Preservation comes next. Communications between the people involved, building access and entry records, transportation records, and the recollections of people who were present are all time-limited in practice, because messages get deleted and recollections settle into the shape of whatever version has been repeated most often. Preservation requests and prompt outreach are ordinary defense work in these matters, and they are considerably more useful early than late.

Because a campus allegation can generate an institutional proceeding under the school’s own policy alongside the criminal matter, sequencing becomes a question in its own right. The processes have different decision-makers, different procedures, and different consequences, and a student who responds to one without regard to the other can create difficulties in the other. Mr. Sris and the firm’s Of Counsel attorneys address that sequencing with the client directly rather than treating the criminal matter as though it existed in isolation.

From there the work is the ordinary work of serious criminal defense: identifying what the prosecution has and what it does not have, tracing the internal consistency of an account across each retelling, retaining investigators where the record calls for it, and preparing the matter as though it will be tried. None of that is a promise about how a particular matter will end. What it provides is a defense built on the statute the accusation is measured against rather than on the weight the accusation carries in the moment it is made.

About Mr. Sris and the Firm’s Of Counsel Attorneys

Mr. Sris is the Owner and Founder of the firm, which has practiced since 1997. He is a former prosecutor, and that period on the charging side of the system informs the way he reads a file: what a report contains, what it leaves out, and what a prosecutor will be asked to establish before a matter can move forward. He is admitted in Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and New York.

The firm’s other attorneys serve in an Of Counsel capacity and contract directly with the firm. On allegations of this kind, Mr. Sris and the firm’s Of Counsel attorneys work as a group, so that statutory analysis, investigation, and hearing preparation are not left to a single calendar. A client is told who is working on the matter and how the work is divided.

Intake for the firm is reachable through a 24/7 phone intake line, and consultations are scheduled by appointment. A student or a parent calling about a campus allegation is not asked to summarize the allegation to an intake line in detail; the purpose of that first contact is to get the matter in front of an attorney promptly. Request a consultation by calling (888) 437-7747.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a campus proceeding the same thing as a criminal case?

No. An institutional proceeding is conducted by the school under the school’s own policy, by people the school selects, and it addresses a student’s standing with that institution. A criminal case is brought by the prosecution under the New York Penal Law and is decided in a New York court. The processes can run at the same time and can involve the same underlying allegation, but they are governed separately and reach separate results. If you are facing both, the interaction between them is something to work through with counsel before responding to either.

What does N.Y. Penal Law § 130.05 mean by lack of consent?

Section 130.05 makes lack of consent an element of every Article 130 offense and then identifies where lack of consent can come from. It can result from forcible compulsion, from incapacity to consent, or from non-acquiescence, and for rape in the third degree under subdivisions seven, eight or nine of § 130.25 it can result from a clearly expressed lack of consent. Which route the prosecution relies on changes what it has to establish, so identifying that route early is part of understanding the charge you are actually facing.

Why does the age of seventeen come up in these matters?

Subdivision 3 of N.Y. Penal Law § 130.05 lists the persons who are deemed incapable of consent, and that list includes those under seventeen. On a campus, students frequently span a range of ages, and the statutory question of capacity to consent is separate from what anyone said or did at the time. Because the analysis turns on the statute rather than on the parties’ own understanding of the situation, it is worth having counsel assess the facts against the text of the subdivision.

Should a student write a statement for the school before speaking with a lawyer?

A student asked for a written account is usually being asked at the point when the least is known and the pressure to explain is highest. An account written at that stage is fixed in place, and it exists while a criminal investigation may still be open. The prudent step is to speak with counsel before writing anything, so that the institutional request and the criminal exposure are considered together. Counsel can also address how and when to engage with the school’s process rather than leaving that decision to the moment.

Does the criminal matter end if the school closes its own process?

Not on its own. A school’s decision resolves the student’s status with that institution under its policy. It does not determine whether the prosecution brings or continues a criminal charge under Article 130, and the criminal matter proceeds under its own procedures. The reverse is also true: the resolution of a criminal matter does not by itself close an institutional proceeding. Each track has to be handled on its own terms, which is why the sequencing question is addressed early rather than after one process has already concluded.

This page provides general information and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Case results depend on a variety of factors unique to each case. Results may vary.

Attorney Advertising. Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C., principal office: 4008 Williamsburg Court, Fairfax, VA 22032. By appointment. Call (888) 437-7747 to schedule.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.