Boston Criminal Attorney Blog

Important Massachusetts OUI/DUI Ruling by SJC On What Constitutes “Conviction”

Fri, 18 May 2012 00:51:25 -0500

As anyone who has visited the Massachusetts OUI/DUI charge pages of my website knows, Melanie’s Law was a new drunk driving law that the Massachusetts Legislature enacted in 2005. The law was named after Melanie Powell of Marshfield, a 13 year-old who was killed as she crossed a street in 2003 by a repeat drunken driver.

The law contained several changes to the Massachusetts drunk driving statute, but its primary purpose and goal was to stiffen the penalties for repeat drunk drivers. The law did this by graduating the punishment meted out for successive convictions of drunk driving. Relatively few people could argue with that goal, but as often happens when legislation is drafted in response to a tragedy, sometimes attention to the details goes missing. Such appears to be the case with a key section of Melanie’s Law, according to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC.) Just yesterday, the court substantially narrowed the legal definition of a “conviction,” ruling that judicial dispositions (findings) that do not reflect a verdict of guilty, a plea of guilty, or a plea of “no contest,” do not constitute a “conviction” for purposes of penalties and punishment for multiple drunk driving offenses.

A little legal backgrounder: In Massachusetts, there is a type of plea that a first-time defendant can enter with the court, which is not exactly a “guilty” finding, nor is it a plea of “no contest” (which also constitutes a guilty finding.) This pleas is known as an “Admission To Sufficient Facts,” sometimes referred to as “Continued Without A Finding”, or CWOF. Primarily reserved for first time offenders in Massachusetts on a wide variety of offenses (not just a Massachusetts OUI/DWI charge,) a plea of Admission To Sufficient Facts, or a CWOF, essentially recognizes that if the Commonwealth were to prosecute the case, sufficient facts exist to secure a conviction, yet the Commonwealth and the defendant are spared a trial. The defendant is almost always placed on probation for a period of time, and if no further offenses are brought forward within that probationary period, the charges are dismissed.

How and why the SJC issued this ruling: Back in 1997, a defendant by the name of Souza was charged with first offense OUI/DUI, and entered a plea of Admission To Sufficient Facts. He was given a probation term, stayed out of trouble and the OUI charge was eventually dismissed. Fast forward 13 years to 2010, when Souza is arrested again on Massachusetts drunk driving charges. He declined to take a breathalyzer test, and as a Dedham MA OUI/DUI lawyer, I should add quickly here: Just because someone refuses to take a breathalyzer test does not mean he or she is legally impaired, or driving drunk. (I routinely advise that most people should not submit to a breathalyzer test.) Because Souza refused to take a breathalyzer, the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles suspended his license for three years, citing his earlier case as constituting a “conviction.” (The Massachusetts RMV is required to suspend a license for three years when a driver who refuses a blood alcohol test has one prior conviction.) If the RMV had not interpreted his 1997 plea of Admission To Sufficient Facts as a conviction, Souza’s would have had his suspended for only six months, under the first-time offender rules.

Souza appealed, and the SJC ruled that the 1997 plea does not constitute a "conviction" under Melanie's Law. Because of this, the court ruled, the Massachusetts RMV should not have categorized him as a second offender and suspended his driver’s license. (In the interests of full disclosure, I should note here that Souza's attorney has reported that his client was acquitted last month in the 2010 case. Almost 2½ years after his license was suspended, the RMV restored it following his recent acquittal.) Recognizing the motivation of increased penalties for multiple OUI offenders , Justice Margaret Botsford wrote, "Even if we were to consider the purpose of Melanie's Law, we are not at liberty to construe the statute in a manner that might advance its purpose but contravenes the actual language chosen by the Legislature."

What does this mean? It means that if the Legislature wants to define a “conviction” as including a plea of Admission To Sufficient Facts or Continued Without A Finding (CWOF,) they are free to do that. But presently, that is not the law. Understandably, there are some people who sharply disagree with this ruling. The lead legislative sponsor of Melanie's Law, State Sen. Bob Hedlund, R-Weymouth, immediately said he intends to confer with the state’s District Attorneys to change the law to define a plea of Admission To Sufficient Facts or Continued Without A Finding (CWOF,) as a “conviction.” "This creates a loophole situation, obviously, where someone benefits from having their case continued without a finding," Hedlund said. "It's just not something that we thought of, but I will tell you that the intent of Melanie's Law was to provide harsher penalties for repeat offenders."

I don’t disagree with that. But as a Norfolk County Massachusetts drunk driving lawyer, I also know that the legislatively-created plea of Admission To Sufficient Facts or Continued Without A Finding was specifically designed to provide first-time offenders of any Massachusetts crime with the ability to essentially admit their mistake, serve probation, prove that they can rectify their behavior, and then move on with a clean court record. If the Legislature now redefines this plea as constituting a “conviction”, it is going to take this opportunity away from tens of thousands of people who move through the Massachusetts court system every year. The end result: Almost all of them will want trials. And that’s going to cost District Attorneys’ offices across the state a lot of time and effort, and it’s going to cost the Commonwealth a lot of money.

I’m all for public safety, and for taking drunk drivers off the roads. But let’s not subtract citizens’ valuable legal rights, and add enormous burdens and costs to the Commonwealth, in the process. Let’s be careful about this issue is approached. Or you just may find yourself in Mr. Souza’s shoes one day.

Boston Robbery Arrests For Alleged Taxi Driver Assault

Tue, 15 May 2012 21:12:20 -0500

Some professions are, understandably, difficult, stressful – and dangerous. Fire fighters, for example, should earn all of our respect for the daily dangers that they are exposed to. It should also come as no surprise to you that taxi drivers also have a dangerous job. They’re constantly in small, closed quarters with a wide variety of strangers, and there’s no telling where those circumstances could lead.

Two Boston robbery arrests this past weekend make my point all the more clear.

It was reported today in The Boston Globe that two men named Shawn Hickey and Brian Cunneen were in a Boston cab this past Sunday night, in Charlestown. According to the Globe Hickey allegedly pointed a gun at the taxi driver and demanded his money. At that point, all three men reportedly got out of the cab and had an altercation. During the melee, Hickey allegedly shot the driver twice with a pellet gun. According to Boston Police, he then got into the taxi’s driver’s seat, carjacked the cab, drove down Devens Street, and crashed into two parked cars before he fled on foot. After a lengthy pursuit, police caught the two men. They were charged in Charlestown District Court with Boston carjacking, Boston robbery, and I’m assuming, Boston assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

As a Boston robbery attorney, I can tell you this: Armed robbery is different from "ordinary" robbery, in that the robbery must have been committed by using a dangerous weapon. A "dangerous weapon" could be any number of things; it doesn't necessarily have to be a gun or a knife – and in this case, it was a pellet gun. If a defendant assaulted or battered the victim, the prosecution may also apply the charge of armed robbery. The sentencing penalties and punishments connected with this crime are very serious - and include the possibility of a life sentence in state prison.

Boston Assault And Battery Arrest At Bachelor Party

Mon, 14 May 2012 21:52:25 -0500

Aren’t weddings fun?

There’s always love, romance, and best wishes for the happy couple.

But what typically goes hand-in-hand at many weddings, and wedding functions such as bachelor parties, is criminal behavior. It’s almost always because alcohol is involved, which lowers people’s inhibitions, and also tends to make them violent. This is the “dirty little secret” that few bridal magazines will tell you about.

This past week, a man named Robert Hernandez was attending a bachelor party at the Boston Marriott Copley Place. According to reports, Mr. Hernandez allegedly grabbed a bottle, and struck one of his friends with it, after the man pushed him to the ground. This is what the injured man, as yet unnamed, told police officers at the scene. Of course, the facts have yet to be determined in a court of law, which in this case will be Boston Municipal Court.

Mr. Hernandez was charged with Boston assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

As a Boston/Dedham assault and battery attorney, I can safely say: Massachusetts assault and battery with a dangerous weapon is a very serious charge. It is absolutely not the type of Massachusetts criminal charge that you can resolve on your own without tremendous legal risks. People charged with this crime face an enormous risk of doing serious time in a state prison facility.

As a Norfolk County defense lawyer with over 20 years of experience defending clients accused of a wide variety of Massachusetts crimes, I never cease to be amazed at how quickly people can let a sudden emotion almost ruin their (and others') lives. I have seen more than once case where an "ordinary fight" turned deadly. My professional advice (no, it never changes on this point): Unless you are attacked first and feel thjat you must physically defend yourself to remain safe from injury, do not "get physical" with anyone else first. It is likely to escalate, and tragedy can follow.

Massachusetts Assault and Battery Arrest Over Parking Spot

Fri, 11 May 2012 22:17:03 -0500

When I was in college, I had braces, and my orthodontist, in Brookline, was a brilliant guy. During my visits every three weeks to adjust my braces, we'd always talk about a number of interesting things, usually historical or political. I’ll never forget one such conversation, because it made such an overwhelming impression on me. We were having a discussion one day in his office about anthropology and human behavior, and he very reflectively commented that people’s civility towards each other exists in direct proportion to the amount of scarce resources around them. This, of course, is an analogue to the law of supply and demand in the field of economics, and merely says that when resources amidst a population are plentiful, human behavior will generally be absent of aggression, but when those resources become scarce or limited, the degree of civility exhibited among human beings will decrease in direct proportion to the amount of scarce resources present.

Translation: When people are competing for a fixed number of goods or resources, and there’s not enough to go around, their civility towards each other dwindles as a result.

I believed this principle as a young man, and as an adult, I still do. It’s sad, but true. As Dedham, Massachusetts assault and battery attorney, I’ve heard all the stories about people getting into fights over a variety of things - and this post has to do with that most coveted of scarce resources in Boston and many communities. Yes, it's the proverbial parking space. In January 2010, a fight over this prized possession developed after a snowstorm in Boston. But it turned into more than just an argument.

In Suffolk Superior Court this past week, one Carmen Andino was sentenced to 2 ½ years in prison, but not because she just argued over a parking space with her neighbor. No, according to court records she allegedly stabbed her 24-year-old neighbor with a kitchen knife, claiming that the neighbor had shoveled out a parking spot before Ms. Andino claimed it as her own.
She was charged with Boston assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

As a Norfolk County Massachusetts assault and battery lawyer, I never cease to be amazed at what can come across my desk. A case like this makes the point I've made previously ever more important: People need to control themselves when arguments develop. Charges like this are very serious, and can quickly develop into something that can ruin a life or career.

Secure Communities Program Comes To Massachusetts

Wed, 09 May 2012 23:27:22 -0500

Previously in this blog, I've written about Secure Communities, the information-sharing program developed by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Secure Communities allows local police and FBI personnel to share fingerprint and other identifying information on on someone who is arrested with federal immigration officials. For many years, it has been standard practice for local police to routinely forward fingerprints of people who they have arrested to the FBI for routine criminal background checks. The major gap with that procedure? Federal immigration officials were never given that information; they were always out of the loop. The result: Many illegal immigrants who had committed numerous crimes, including violent crimes, remained here illegally. Through the Secure Communities program, the FBI will now share those fingerprints with immigration officials to identify illegal immigrants for deportation, especially violent criminals and repeat offenders.

In my prior post on this subject, I generally supported Secure Communities, albeit with some concerns about the potential for non-violent immigrants to become subject to deportation in the effort to identify illegal immigrants who are also violent criminals. On the whole, I supported this program, with some cautionary comments.

At the time that ICE first indicated its intention to bring the program to Massachusetts, Governor Deval Patrick and other more liberal-leaning politicians in Masachusetts, spoke out strongly against the program, mostly citing over-dramatized, worst-case scenarios of non-violent immigrants being deported left and right, and of "racial profiling" run amok. I found most of that over-the-top catastrophizing to be needless drama. The facts are that the number of illegal immigrangts in our midst who are either violent criminals, or who flagrantly flout the law without hesitation, is very high. Like it or not, that is true. Recent examples of this fact abound: Just last week, a florist on Cape Cod was killed after allegedly being struck by an illegal immigrant who officials said had overstayed her visa. Last Friday, an illegal Guatemalan immigrant was arrested after he allegedly tried to run down a State Police trooper - while driving drunk. In a well-known case last August, someone from Milford was struck and killed by an illegal immigrant, who was also charged with drunk driving. These examples don't even begin to touch drug dealing.

Something both effective and reasonable has to be done about this, and the Secure Communties Program meets both of those objectives. I find the claims of "racial profiling" being waged by most immigrant rights groups to be without merit, and I find the present iteration of the Secure Communities Program to be necessary, balanced, and laudable.

Some of my colleagues in the criminal defense bar (as well as non-attorneys,) would find my position quite surprising. My response: Don't be so surprised. While, as a Norfolk County Massachusetts criminal defense attorney I devote myself to an aggressive defense of my clients who are accused of crimes such as Massachusetts OUI, Massachusetts drug crimes, Massachusetts domestic violence, or Massachusetts assault and battery, I also believe in the rule of law, and in order. That means locating and if necessary deporting illegal immigrants who have flouted our laws and/or who commit violent crimes. I don't want the people I care about to become a victim of violent crime. Neither should critics of this program.

So my message to them: Stop with the protesting and catastrophizing, and get with the program.

CORI Changes Take Effect In Massachusetts

Sun, 06 May 2012 22:21:00 -0500

For some time now, there has been a lot of friction between the employer community in Massachusetts, and (generally speaking,) civil rights groups, over the issue of access to criminal records. Those records are maitained by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety under a system known as the Criminal Offender Records Information, or the CORI unit.

Broadly speaking, business and employers feel that they need and should have broad access to search the potential criminal records of job and housing applicants. When making these criminal records searches, employers typically like to go back many years, perhaps as many as 25 years or more. Opposing this viewpoint are civil rights groups representing ex-convicts and former prisoners, who argue that after a person is punished and pays his or her debt to society, they should be allowed to seal their criminal records and move on with their lives. Without the ability to seal their criminal records after staying out of trouble for a certain amount of time, they feel their ability to turn their lives around and start anew will always be limited, because background checks will always reveal their criminal records. Thrown into this controversy is the role of private background-screening companies, which make their money from businesses who pay them to dig way back into court records of mainly job and housing applicants. These companies have often been accused of reporting false or conflicting information about applicants to employers.

Despite all this controversy, the law governing CORI searches in Massachuetts has just been changed, and those changes took effect today, May 7 2012. As a result, if in the past you you have been convicted of a crime in Massachusetts – it could be Massachusetts OUI/DUI Driving Under The Influence of Alcohol, Massachuetts Gun and Firearms violations, a Massachusetts Assault and Battery charge, a Massachusetts drug offense, or a Massachusetts sex offense, to name a few, you should know about these new changes.

The changes will include a new, online system to make it easier for employers and landlords to conduct criminal background checks on applicants, but it will also limit searches to 10 years back. There is an exception for homicides and sex offenses. The search results in the new online system are also not supposed to include old arrests which did not result in a conviction. This is good news for people who have a criminal record, but hope to get on with their lives, get good jobs, and put their past behind them. But these people need to be made aware of these changes first.

The new amendments involve Massachusetts General Laws c. 276 100A, 100B and 100C. These amendments basically say that even if you once got in trouble with the law, if you stay out of trouble for a significant period of time, you can seal that criminal record and begin again with a clean slate. If you were convicted of a misdemeanor five or more years ago, that record is now eligible to be sealed. If you were convicted of a felony 10 or more years ago, it is now also eligible to be sealed. Prior to these amendments, a person had to wait 10 years to seal misdemeanors, and 15 years for felonies.

Importantly, the new amendment requires that between the time of your conviction, and the time of your application to seal your record, you must have no other convictions anywhere in the United States for the amount of time specified.

What if you are someone who believes that you shouldn’t have been charged with a crime in the first place? If you were charged with a crime, and the case was later terminated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, a no bill was entered by a grand jury, you were found not guilty, or a dismissal was entered by the court, you now qualify to seal your record.

To take advantage of the new amendments, and to successfully seal your records, you should see a Dedham/Boston criminal defense attorney as soon as possible.

Boston Federal Court Embezzlement Charges Allege Theft of More Than $1 Million

Fri, 04 May 2012 22:36:53 -0500

This story just goes to show you that you need to be extra careful with the company credit card.

A Watertown man was recently charged in federal court in Boston, with allegedly misusing the company credit card. John J. Palandjian is accused of allegedly making unauthorized purchases and taking out cash advances of about $1.1 Million from his former employer, Iron Mountain Inc., a Boston company that helps corporate customers manage their business records. Reportedly, Mr. Palandjian had worked at Iron Mountain as a sourcing manager.

After the alleged Massachusetts embezzlement, Mr. Palandjian is accused of taking measures to hide the charges, yet ensure that his bills were paid. For this alleged Massachusetts theft crime, Mr. Palandjian was charged with 10 counts of wire fraud, which is a federal offense. If he is convicted of all counts, he could face a $250,000 fine, a forfeiture of all of the money he allegedly embezzled, and up to 20 years in prison. These are the penalties for this crime that apply in federal court, which is not the same as a Massachusetts state court.

As a Dedham/Boston theft crimes attorney, I can tell you that the crime of embezzlement is serious, and more common than many people might think. Typically, for a defendant to be convicted of embezzlement, the prosecution must prove several things. First, it must be proven that the defendant, prior to the larceny, had been entrusted with either possession or custody of property belonging to another, or that the defendant had occupied a position of trust over the money, assets or property in question. This is a legal prerequisite. Second, it must be proven that the defendant stole, concealed, or "converted" the cash, property or assets in question to his personal use without the consent or permission of the true owner. Third, it must be proven that the defendant had the intention to permanently deprive the real owner of the cash or property that is in question.

When charges like this are brought in federal court instead of state court, it is usually because the alleged acts of the defendant either involved transactions that occurred in more than one state, or somehow involved inter-state commerce, or involved federal contracts in some manner. In this case, the charges involve wire fraud, which is a federal offense. When such charges are brought in federal court instead of state court, the punishments for theft crimes such as embezzlement, larceny and robbery can be more severe.

Massachusetts Indecent Solicitation Arrest

Wed, 02 May 2012 22:34:02 -0500

Be careful what you say in a text message.

It used to be that phone calls and letters could be used in a court of law, to prove one guilty of indecent sexual solicitation. Nowadays, this Massachusetts sex crime can also be committed by text messaging, and here’s one example of that.

Last week a 21-year-old Massachusetts man was arrested and charged with a Raynham sex crime: Indecent solicitation of a 14-year-old girl who lives in Tiverton, R.I. Chad Virgil Souza was charged with a soliciting a child – a felony offense in Massachusetts – after he allegedly sent numerous text messages to a 14-year-old girl, mentioning sexual intercourse and drug use.

Reportedly this case dates back to December, 2011. The father of the girl had notified police when he realized the sexual content of the text messages his daughter was receiving. Because of that, police seized the girl’s cellphone, and arrested Souza. He was arraigned in Rhode Island’s Second District Court, with his bail set at $10,000.

As a Massachusetts sex crimes attorney, I can tell you this: Of all the crimes that someone can be charged with nowadays, a sex crime is one of the worst. District Attorneys’ offices across Massachusetts prosecute these cases very aggressively. If you are charged with a Massachusetts sex offense, and conviction results, your life can be completely ruined. Punishments are harsh: Convictions carry as much as 20 years in state prison, plus lengthy probation, court-ordered psychotherapy, and GPS monitoring -- with an electronic device locked on to your ankle or wrist.

Massachusetts Clerk-Magistrate Declines To Issue Assault & Battery Charges In Hockey Game

Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:39:41 -0500

Readers of this blog may remember that three years ago I posted a blog about a football player at Arlington Catholic High School, who faced Massachusetts assault and battery charges after he allegedly “head-butted” a football player at an Abington High School footbal game, In that case, I saw the defendant as possibly exhibiting the specific intent required to commit the crime charged.

Just a few days ago, there was a similar case in Duxbury, in which a high school student filed charges of assault and battery against a hockey player at Scituate High school. The victim, Tucker Hannon, filed the charges against Alex Way, charging him with needlessly “checking” him – hockey parlance for slamming into him. It resulted in Mr. Hannon experiencing a concussion and missing five weeks of school. He was also forced to sit in darkness for two weeks while recovering, as exposure to light can aggravate such a head injury.

However, yesterday, at a Massachusetts Clerk-Magistrate hearing in Plymouth District Court, the Clerk Magistrate, Philip McCue, found no probable cause for the complaint. What this means, in layman’s terms, is that the Clerk-Magistrate determined that there was no "probable cause" to find that young Way posessed the specific intent to commit an assault and battery against young Hannon. The legal elements of assault and battery can be found by clicking here. As a result of the Clerk-Magistrate's findings, no charges were brought against young Mr. Way.

Durign the game, no penalty was issued for the play, and the coach of the Scituate boys hockey team was quoted in the Patriot Ledger newspaper as saying it was a “good, clean hit.” Despite this, Hannon's parents and Hannon filed an Application for Criminal Complaint with the court, thus triggering the hearing.

As a Norfolk County assault and battery attorney, here’s my take: Hockey and football students need to be careful to remember that just because they're playing in a "game," doesn't give them license or free reign to engage in gratuitous, or needless, violence when in the game. In many cases, aggression on the ice and on the field can cross the line. As my previous 2009 blog (above) about criminal charges brought in the Arlington High School football game showed, and as this incident showed, these games are often no "game."

Massachusetts Assault and Battery Charges at Franklin High School

Fri, 27 Apr 2012 23:23:34 -0500

On this blog, one of my goals is to educate the general public about the law and how it can affect them. As a Dedham, Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer, I know that most people have a lot of misconceptions about certain laws.

For example, most people think that “assaulting” someone, in an assault-and-battery charge, means hitting or striking them. Not true. In general, “assault” means a threat of violence, and not the actual bodily contact itself. Furthermore, a “battery” refers to the actual physical contact of another person -- without his or her consent. The upshot? No actual physical harm has to result for a Massachusetts assault and battery charge to be filed.

Here is an interesting twist on how assault and battery charges can be brought in Massachusetts. There was a recent development last week in which a Franklin High School student videotaped an assault by one student on another. It resulted in not one, but two students being charged with assault and battery – the one who actually carried out the assault, and the accomplice student who made the videotape of it. This can serve to illustrate that you don’t necessarily have to be the actual assailant– in order to be charged with the underlying offense.

Here’s what allegedly happened: A student at Franklin High School – let’s call him Student #1 – attacked another – let’s call him Student #2. Student #1 allegedly waited for Student #2 in the hallway, reportedly because he thought that Student #2 had been “talking trash” about him. Student #1 “sucker-punched” Student #2. The incident was recorded on video by Student #3, and later posted on Twitter. Police said that the presence of Student #3, making a recording of the attack, proves that it was premeditated and not spontaneous. In legal terms, Students #1 and #3 were part of a "conspiracy" and "joint enterprise,", and thus, both were charged with Massachusetts assault and battery.

Students, especially in high school, should remember that physical confrontations are not always “simple fights.” They can have enormous legal consequences and ramifications that can stay on your record and haunt you for the rest of your life.

Stoughton High School Student Arrested For Planned Columbine "Copycat" Attack

Wed, 25 Apr 2012 00:30:58 -0500

It seems that we, as a nation, are never going to be able to forget the tragedy of Columbine.

A few weeks ago, on Fox-TV 25, I spoke to anchor Maria Stephanos about an Attleboro, Massachusetts student who had just posted on Facebook his plans for a Columbine-style attack at his high school – for which he was arrested. At that time, and on that broadcast, I stressed the need for parents to monitor their kids. It’s one thing for a student to complain to his fellow student about his teachers, but it’s entirely different when you tell the world, on Facebook, about your specific plans to seriously harm your teachers and kill them.

Earlier this week, another student, this time at Stoughton High School, was also arrested for alleged plans for yet another Columbine-type attack. Specifically, the student, Sean Ivaldi, 18, was charged with causing a school disturbance, four counts of threatening to commit Massachusetts crimes -- some of which will doubtless involve charges of threatened Massachusetts gun and firearms violations – along with threatened Massachusetts assault and battery with a dangerous weapon charges, and a felony charge of making a terrorist threat. It ha been reported that Ivaldi had outlined a devastating attack on the school in his journal, which was discovered by a school administrator.

Ivaldi allegedly used a “point system” to describe his planned killings – 20 points for murdering a student, 30 for killing a teacher, and 60 points for each police officer. Allegedly, he had also had made a drawing in his journal, which included the words, “enter b-building at 11:09 and shoot the teacher at the desk.”

Based on this information, police found probable cause and made an arrest. He was held without bail.

As a Westwood, Massachusetts criminal defense attorney, I’ll reiterate that “probable cause” is the legal standard required to make an arrest, and this legal standard is easily reached in Massachusetts. And if you’re a parent, I hope you’re listening to me, as I advise you to monitor your kids' social activities and postings on social media. Getting arrested when you are a teenager can have devastating consequences, and can also lead to jail time – and a criminal record for life, which can haunt a young person forever.

Foxborough, Massachusetts Arrest On Charges Of Threatening To Commit A Crime

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 22:45:32 -0500

Today’s lesson: You can be arrested by merely threatening to commit a crime.

Most people don’t know this fact. But as a Massachusetts criminal defense attorney,I can tell you that it is quite true, and certainly bears paying attention to.

Case in point: a Foxborough, Massachusetts man named Michael Viscardi was arrested this past week, on a charge of threatening to commit a crime against Town Selectman Mark Sullivan. Apparently, Mr. Visconti told Mr. Sullivan that he would be a “dead man” if he did not support the proposed casino that Las Vegas developer Steve Wynn is planning to build in Foxborough. There was another alleged incident, as well. The verbal attacks escalated to Mr. Viscardi “staring down” Mr. Sullivan -- who lives on the same street -- while wielding an axe and tossing it hand to hand.

In response, this past Tuesday Mr. Sullivan took out a Massachusetts Harassment Prevention Order against Mr. Viscardi. He claims that he and Mr. Viscardi have had more than a few confrontations in recent months, and that at some point he had to “draw a line in the sand.” Still, Mr. Sullivan says he refuses to change his opposition to the casino. He has since sent his family away to a safer place. Fueling this situation, police were apparently familiar with Mr. Viscardi, and had responded previously to his home concerning other alleged incidents. Concerning this immediate incident, Mr. Viscardi pleaded not guilty.

So, take a lesson from this. Be careful in what you say, because you too can be arrested for threatening to commit Massachusetts assault and battery, Massachusetts sexual assault and rape, Massachusetts domestic violence, you name it.

Furthermore, if you are worried that you are being investigated for a crime and might be arrested soon, stop worrying and do this: click here to receive our FREE document entitled “The Top 10 Things To Do If You Are Arrested In Massachusetts.” If you have either already been arrested – or fear that you may be arrested soon - you are probably feeling scared, confused and overwhelmed. Our FREE document will help you navigate this sea of uncertainly and spell out the steps you need to take to protect yourself and your legal rights.

Accused Dover, Massachusetts Rapist Granted New Trial By SJC

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 22:05:56 -0500

Convicted rapist William Polk of Dover, Massachusetts, has good reason to be optimistic today, now that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has granted him a retrial on the statutory rape charges he was convicted of two years ago. Mr. Polk was convicted in February, 2010, on two charges of Massachusetts statutory rape, for allegedly raping a then 15-year-old girl. What was highly unusual in the case was not the questionable testimony involved, but that almost the entire town of Dover actively spoke out in support of Mr. Polk while he was awaiting trial, during his trial, and after his conviction. Indicative of the level of community support he received, after Mr. Polk was indicted and charged, he was not fired from his job as a sports coach - working with high school-age students - in Dover.

After a jury deliberated five days, the jurors returned a guilty verdict. Superior Court judge Janet Sanders sentenced Polk to four to five years in state prison, but his attorney appealed his conviction. The court granted his application for direct appellate review, and this week ruled that defense testimony was improperly excluded by Judge Sanders, ordering a retrial.
Court documents reveal that there was an exclusion of evidence at the trial two years ago, indicating prejudicial error in the process. That evidence pertained to the expert testimony of a licensed psychologist, Dr. Daniel Brown, and the victim’s biological mother. Dr. Brown’s testimony, for example, would have revealed that he believed that the alleged victim had a psychological condition known as “dissociative amnesia,” and thus, could have fabricated or distorted her allegations against Polk. But Judge Sanders ruled, in favor of the prosecution, that Dr. Brown wasn’t allowed to give his testimony in the Norfolk Superior Court trial. At the time of the trial, Judge Sanders ruled that Dr. Brown’s opinion was speculative.

Clearly, taking five days to reach its verdict, the jury had a difficult time making their decision.
Mr. Polk, in his appeal, argued that excluding Dr. Brown’s evidence prevented him the opportunity to explain to the jury the possibility that the victim’s allegations were fabricated or came from a distorted memory. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reversed the convictions because they felt that Mr. Polk was denied his constitutional right to present his defense, a legal conclusion I thoroughly agree with.

As a Massachusetts rape attorney, I'm glad to see this order from the SJC in this case. Justice will be better served if Mr,. Polk is allowed to present his fullest possible defense testimony, from a psychological expert or otherwise.

I can tell you this: Massachusetts statutory rape charges often bring devastating consequences -- regardless of whether or not the sex was consensual. A conviction on statutory rape charges can result not only in a lengthy state prison sentence, but it can destroy someone's life and result in required sex offender-registration status after release from incarceration.

It is entirely possible here that an innocent man may have been convicted of a crime he did not commit. Justice could not be served until a trial jury could hear a full presentation of expert testimony in Mr. Polk's defense.

Top 10 Tips On What To Do If You Are Arrested In Massachusetts

Fri, 13 Apr 2012 20:12:44 -0500

As a Boston and Norfolk County criminal defense lawyer, I completely understand the anxiety and fear that people experience, if they believe they are going to be arrested. And the feelings that they also have after they are arrested. Being handcuffed and put into a police cruiser is a scary experience that elicits all kinds of bad emotions – everything from embarassment, to worry, to being overwhelmed. It’s one of those situations in life where you can't believe that you are saying to yourself, “I think I'm going to be arrested. What do I do now?" or, "I've just been arrested. What do I do now?"

It doesn’t matter if you’ve been arrested and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol (OUI/DUI), shoplifting, assault and battery, or rape. Our legal offices in Westwood and Boston handle all matter of crimes, in a wide variety of towns, and we successfully defend people who have been arrested and don’t know the first steps they should take to protect themselves and their rights.

That’s why I created a FREE “tip sheet” showcasing the Top 10 things you should do if, and after, you’ve been arrested in Massachusetts. Chances are, no other attorney will offer you this information, which everyone can download for FREE, by simply clicking here. This is advice on what to do after being arrested.

One of the tips, for example, is that you should ask any Massachusetts criminal defense lawyer you speak with if he or she has been ranked by a professional attorney rating organization such as www.avvo.com. Click here to see our ranking on Avvo, which is 8.1 out of 10, which is rated as “excellent.”

Don’t waste time being afraid, if or after you’ve been arrested. Request our FREE tip sheet and get yourself on the road to getting your life back. You deserve to take the best care of yourself at this most difficult, stressful time.

Dedham Rape Charges Against Noted Cosmetic Surgeon

Thu, 12 Apr 2012 21:01:28 -0500

His website lists him as “Dr Youth.” But Dr. Dave David, a prominent Dedham-based cosmetic surgeon, unfortunately has a new title for himself: Accused rapist.

Dr. David is facing serious charges of rape in Norfolk Superior Court in Dedham. Dr. David is charged not only with Dedham rape, but another Massachusetts sex crime that includes Dedham indecent assault and battery on someone over the age of 14. The claims come from a woman who said the attacks by him took place in April 2010.

This past Monday, Dr. David pleaded not guilty, and posted $5,000 bail, at his arraignment in Norfolk Superior Court. He was ordered to stay away from the alleged victim. Apparently, she claims that she and Dr. David struggled in a master bedroom, while he told her, “We can make this easy or we can make this hard.” He allegedly said these things as he removed her clothes, before allegedly raping her. Allegedly, a second woman has come forward, claiming that Dr. David had also assaulted her in 2004. She has not pursued charges, but reportedly is willing to testify in the current case. She would be known as a “prior misconduct witness.”

As a Dedham, Massachusetts rape defense lawyer, I can assure you that when someone is accused of sexual assault or rape, the accusation can often be misleading. In fact, it reflects something I say all the time: “There is always a story behind the story.” It’s true -- just because someone points the finger, doesn’t necessarily mean that the accused person is guilty of the crime. In many circumstances, the facts aren't always clear. In fact, there are many instances of people who have been accused of "rape," or “sexual assault,” when they were not guilty of either of those crimes at all. When someone is accused of a Massachusetts sex crime, calm – and a cool head – are needed, by both the defendant and his Norfolk County Massachusetts sex crimes attorney.