Articles Posted in Drug Crimes

| by

As most in the legal community know, possession of an ounce or less of marijuana has been decriminalized in Massachusetts. That does not mean that it is not “against the law” to possess and ounce or less of marijuana, it simply means that a fine is the potential penalty, similar to a speeding ticket or another traffic violation. If the individual is an adult a $100.00 fine is imposed and the marijuana is confiscated. In the event that a person under eighteen is found to be in the possession of the substance, he or she must attend a drug awareness program. However, the legislature has not decriminalized possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, distribution of marijuana or trafficking marijuana. Furthermore, operating under the influence of marijuana is a criminal offense.

In Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459 (2011) , the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court discussed the effects that the decriminalization of a possession of marijuana can have on traffic stops by police officers and subsequent searches of the car, driver and passengers. In Cruz, the Court upheld the lower trial court’s suppression of evidence holding that a civil citation should have issued for the car being parked next to a hydrant however, reasonable suspicion of criminal activity was necessary to further detain the driver and probable cause is necessary to support an exit order and search of the car. Thus, from a defense point of view, the decriminalization has been a step in further securing an individual’s right to be free from unlawful searches and seizures.

As briefly discussed above, the law does not exempt an individual from all crimes that relate to marijuana. A person can still be charged with illegal possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, distribution of marijuana and trafficking of marijuana, even if the amount is under an ounce if other factors are present. Furthermore, if the intent to distribute or distribution occurs in a school zone a defendant can face a mandatory sentence of two years in jail. Items that are often associated with the distribution of marijuana are scales, baggies, razor blades, cutting agents and a large amount of cash.

A practical approach to defending a client charged with any drug offense include examining the facts to determine whether a motion to suppress the stop, motion to suppress the evidence and motion to suppress the search should be filed. Furthermore, a motion to dismiss is also often appropriate in circumstance in which there is clearly not enough to infer that the defendant actually distributed or intended to distribute the substance.

Continue Reading

| by

Joshua Rockwood and his wife Jessica Rockwood, twenty seven and thirty one years of age respectively, are going to have to remain in jail for a while according to a judge sitting in Taunton, Massachusetts. Both have been charged with Trafficking Heroin in the Taunton District Court. The complaint follows a July 1, 2011 arrest during which police from several local law enforcement agencies conducted a raid pursuant to a search warrant at the couple’s home. During the search police found over one thousand four hundred bags of heroin with a street value estimated at fourteen thousand dollars. Officers also found a sawed off shotgun during the search. Only Jessica Rockwood was home at that time however the next day Joshua was arrested and found in possession of over two hundred bags of heroin and two thousand dollars cash. In addition to Heroin Trafficking the pair was charged with Possession of a Firearm and Receiving Stolen Property Over $250. Both defendants have been charged on several occasions with crimes as indicated by the district attorney during the arraignment and bail hearing. The article does not mention the quantity of heroin allegedly trafficked however it is likely that this case will be prosecuted in the Superior Court in New Bedford.

Read Article:

http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/cops_and_courts/x1850042721/Couple-in-drug-case-denied-bail

What interests me most about this case as a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer is the information law enforcement might have possessed prior to applying for a search warrant. I am sure that prosecutor provided the judge with a history of facts he felt deserving of a no bail order. None of these are however mentioned in this article. The quantity of heroin, the presence of a firearm and the criminal records of the defendants in this case without more might warrant the imposition of a high bail but not detention without bail. So what other facts might have been imparted to the judge at the bail hearing? Were there controlled buys made by undercover officers, informants or both? Were sales where the purchasers were apprehended witnessed for an extensive period of time? Perhaps most significantly, what involvement did each spouse have in the operation. Many times our office has been approached by couples who simply because of their relationship have been get charged together. Many times however the case against one of the spouses gets dismissed due to inadequacies in the evidence against him or her. However, almost always will the district attorney charge both the husband and the wife when a search warrant is executed at a home and drugs are found. Having an experienced lawyer is the best way to ensure that justice is done and that an innocent spouse does not suffer for the crimes of the other.

Continue Reading

| by

Law enforcement officials at the state, federal and local levels arrested twenty eight people in the Brockton area yesterday following an investigation targeting low to mid-level drug dealers selling Cocaine and Crack Cocaine. The ages of the defendants ranges from nineteen to forty nine years old and includes women, men and homeless people. Most of the defendants are from Brockton, with a few from Bridgewater and Raynham. The charges leveled at the defendants vary. Some are charged with Cocaine Distribution, Conspiracy to Violate the Drug Laws, Distribution of Crack Cocaine, School Zone Violations, Heroin Distribution and Distribution of Cocaine Second and Subsequent Offense. Bail ranged from personal to thirty thousand dollars cash. The investigation was named Operation Street Sweeper II. This operation follows two other successful large scale investigations in the Brockton area in the last year. The cases are pending in the Brockton District Court. According to newspaper reports one courtroom was set aside to handle all of the arraignments in this case.

Read Article:

http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/cops_and_courts/x438682197/Police-arrest-34-suspected-drug-dealers-in-Operation-Street-Sweeper-II-in-Brockton

Operation Street Sweeper.jpg

Brockton Cocaine Distribution Defense Lawyer

All throughout Massachusetts and the entire country police have been implementing various tactics aimed at disrupting street-level drug dealing activities. Among these strategies are controlled buys, raids and large scale crackdowns. The latter method deploys large numbers of undercover officers who typically target Heroin, Crack and Cocaine dealers. There is a belief that the effectiveness of these operations is limited to the short term. Once the arrests are made and law enforcement vacates the area drug dealers come to the area quickly and establish or reestablish their presence. This can be defeated if there is a follow up plan that prevents the reinstatement of the unlawful activities. It is however generally agreed that drug sweeps do result in a diminution of drug dealing activities at least initially and that getting these people off the streets is a good start towards fighting drug dealing efforts.

There is often difficulty in effectively prosecuting these kinds of cases. People arrested in drug sweeps are done so an extended time after the commission of the alleged activity. For instance, if the police are engaged in one of these large scale operations they will often make the controlled buy and not effectuate the arrest until a future date. This makes the job of the Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney somewhat easier. Doubt is often raised in these cases simply because jurors cannot understand why the police would wait to make an arrest. People simply do not believe that a police officer would fail to make an arrest immediately after witnessing a crime. It is counterintuitive to the lay person. Evidence of the overall operation might be excluded at trial particularly in cases where there in no link between the various people arrested and charged with drug dealing.

Continue Reading

| by

Can you imagine being only twenty three years old, being held in a jail on seventy five thousand dollars and facing a minimum mandatory fifteen year state prison sentence. That is exactly the predicament Roger Jones of Manchester, New Hampshire is in right now. According to an article in today’s Lynn Item, Jones was arrested for Trafficking OxyCodone. The estimated value of the drugs seized is about sixty thousand dollars. Apparently, in January a post office official became suspicious of a package addressed to someone in Lynn, Massachusetts. Law enforcement got involved. They opened the package and found about two thousand OxyCodone pills in a cotton candy machine. The package was subsequently delivered to the Lynn address. The recipient worked with police and contacted the person who was ultimately to receive the drugs. This was Chrystalina Cruz of Salem, Massachusetts. Cruz and Jones went to the Lynn address to accept the package. Both were arrested. Cruz was released on ten thousand dollars cash bail.

Read Article:

Essex County OxyContin Trafficking Defense Attorney

One of the things this article fails to address is why it took months to get Jones into court for his arraignment. It appears that the police arrested him in January, near the time that the postal inspector first became suspicious of the package. Why then wait until now to get Jones arraigned. Moreover, it strikes me that the bail is somewhat high right now. The article makes no mention of a prior criminal history, or Jones being a danger to the community or the risk that Jones will flee the jurisdiction in an attempt to evade prosecution.

Substantively I have several questions about the viability of this prosecution. What information did the police have regarding Jones at the time of the arrest? Did they simply see him appear with Cruz or did they have conversations with him suggesting that he was arriving to get the drugs? Was the woman in Lynn able to provide incriminating information pertaining to Jones or only about Cruz? Did Jones take possession of the drugs prior to his arrest or was he arrested at the time he got to the home in Lynn? A Massachusetts OxyCodone Trafficking Defense Lawyer would need the answers to these questions in preparing to defend Cruz. Keep in mind, absent any affirmative evidence that Jones intended to possess OxyCodone with the intent to distribute the drugs there is no viable trafficking case against him. Similarly, absent an agreement between Jones, Cruz and or the woman at the home in Lynn any Conspiracy indictment against Jones would be weak. Cruz too may have defenses to this case. It is clears that the unnamed woman in Lynn was involved with the trafficking operation. When pressed, she blamed Cruz and said in so many words that Cruz made her do it. She called Cruz to come over to her home. However absent some evidence that Cruz went over there to access the drugs or evidence showing that Cruz even knew that drugs had been sent there it might be difficult to successfully prosecute her.

Continue Reading

| by

Over the course of a month-long drug investigation undercover state police officers purchased heroin on four occasions from Lawrence, Massachusetts resident Jonathan Castro. The buys occurred on two separate days in May and two in June, the latest being this past Tuesday. It is alleged that during the last transaction Castro sold somewhere around twenty grams of heroin to an undercover officer. Castro was in a car being driven by Jose Ventura of Methuen, Massachusetts. Officers made a connection between Castro and an apartment on Dracut Street as well. Castro had the keys to the apartment in his possession at the time of his arrest. Officers went to the apartment and using the key gained entry to the premises. They found Jhon Ramos, also of Lawrence, inside the apartment. Officers claim that Ramon permitted the search and signed a consent form. The apartment contained over twenty eight grams of heroin, a scale, cash and related drug distribution paraphernalia. All three suspects were charged with Trafficking Heroin, Over Twenty Eight Grams and Conspiracy to Violate the Drug Laws. Castro and Ramos were also charged with a School Zone Violation. All of these defendants will be prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem.

Read Article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x177904619/Three-arrested-on-drug-trafficking-charges

Just yesterday I blogged on joint venture in Massachusetts and its applicability to people who are simply present at a crime scene. Today’s post presents a very different view of that legal theory. While the article does not clearly indicate Ventura’s involvement in the crimes it does suggest inferentially that he was present with the purpose of facilitating Castro’s efforts to sell heroin. If that is the situation, and the prosecution can establish facts that support Ventura’s active involvement in the distribution efforts his defense becomes more complicated. Certainly there may be innocent reasons why he was with Castro and perhaps his presence had nothing to do with drug distribution. In that case Ventura’s Massachusetts Drug Trafficking Defense Attorney will defend this case on the theory that there lacks sufficient evidence to support a prosecution. This can be done prior to trial or at trial depending on the facts particular to this case and the attorney’s defense strategy. The defense for Castro will likely be different. In the case of hand to hand sales entrapment is the typical defense. Ramos’ defense might hinge on the voluntariness of his consent and the extent of his involvement with the items found at the apartment, if any. All of these gentlemen have a battle in front of them that requires the skill and commitment of an Experienced Massachusetts Heroin Trafficking Lawyer.

Continue Reading

| by

Thirty-two year old Guarionex Pratts is charged with trafficking over 500 grams of heroin and trafficking over 28 grams of oxycodone. The Lawrence Eagle Tribune reports that a tip to the Drug Enforcement Administration Tipline led to the search of Pratts North Andover apartment located at 26 Royal Crest Drive Apartment #6. Apparently, Pratts consented to the search of his apartment in which investigators found 2.2 pounds of heroin, hundreds of oxycodone pills, $5,000.00 cash, drug packaging materials and heroin packaged for what investigators claim was for sale to customers. Pratts faces a fifteen year mandatory minimum sentence just on the heroin charge alone. According to the Tribune, the street value of the heroin is estimated at $150,000 and the street value of the pills is said to be valued at approximately $2,000.00. There was another drug raid at Royal Crest this fall which netted 54 kilograms of cocaine. Acting North Andover Police Chief Paul Gallagher stated that he has been working with the management at Royal Crest to start a Neighborhood Watch Program, which they evidently need!

One obstacle that defendants charged with drug offenses often face is that they often face mandatory minimum sentences. For example, if a defendant is charged with possession with intent to distribute or distribution of a controlled substance in a school zone, possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance or distribution of a controlled substance as a subsequent offender or trafficking a controlled substance he or she faces at least two years to two years and a day from and after to twenty years in state prison. A defendant is often at the mercy of an unsympathetic District Attorney’s Office to either reduce the charge from a school zone or a second and subsequent offense to a first offense or reduce the amount alleged to have been trafficked so that a defendant can receive a reduced sentence. When a defendant is sentenced to a “mandatory minimum” sentence THE WHOLE SENTENCE MUST BE SERVED!” A defendant will not receive a reduction in time to be served based on good conduct or work.

That being said, there are many strategies that an experienced Boston area defense lawyer can employ to successfully defend these types of case. The following is a list of pre-trial evidentiary and non-evidentiary motions that, depending on the facts of a case, can be filed:
Non-Evidentiary
• Motion to Disclose Informant(s)
• Motion For Informant Regulations
• Motion For Disclosure Of Any Payment To An Informant
• Motion For Locations For School Zone Measurement
• Motion For List Of Experts
• Motion For Prior And Subsequent Bad Acts Of Defendant To Be Used At Trial
• Motion For Surveillance Location
• Motion For List Of Evidence Seized As The Result Of Any Search
• Motion For Certificate Of Analysis
• Motion To Sever Cases (If Applicable)
Evidentiary Motions
• Motion To Dismiss
• Motion To Suppress Stop And Evidence
• Motion To Suppress The Search And Evidence
• Motion To Suppress The Stop and Search And Evidence
• Motion To Remand Case To A Clerk’s Hearing (Misdemeanors Only)
• Motion For A “Frank’s Hearing”
• Motion To Suppress Statements

Continue Reading

| by

Two nights ago Guarionex Pratts of North Andover, Massachusetts was arrested at his apartment by North Andover Police and DEA agents. Apparently a call to the DEA Tipline alerted authorities to the existence of Drug Dealing Activities at the apartment. The tip stemmed from neighbors concerns about an odor suggestive of drug activities in the building. The Lawrence Eagle Tribune is reporting that Pratts consented to a search of his apartment. During the Search officers found hundreds of Oxycodone pills, a significant sum of cash and over two pounds of Heroin. Packaging products or Drug Paraphernalia was also found and seized during the search. The smell that alarmed the neighbors was determined to come from cutting agents used to dilute the drugs being that were being packaged for street level sales. The heroin was valued at around one hundred fifty thousand dollars. Pratts has been charged with Trafficking Heroin and Trafficking Oxycodone. There is a mandatory minimum fifteen year sentence for a conviction of the Heroin Trafficking Offense. Pratts, who is thirty two years old, is believed to be supplying Drug Dealers in Lawrence, Massachusetts. If the Massachusetts state courts retain jurisdiction of the case it will likely be prosecuted in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem.

Read Article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1517687098/Accused-heroin-dealer-arrested-at-Royal-Crest-apartments

As a Massachusetts Criminal Attorney who has handled hundreds of drug cases in Essex County something immediately hits me when I read this article. Did Pratts really consent to the search of his apartment? The sheer quantity of drugs found suggests that whoever was responsible for these substances was not a novice. He or she had extensive experience in the Massachusetts drug underworld. Anyone with this level of familiarity with the drug trade would not simply consent to the search of his apartment. They would say no to the request to search. Massachusetts laws require a valid search warrant to justify a search of someone’s property. There are exceptions to the warrant requirement. Consent is one of those exceptions. Large scale drugs dealers however never consent. This leads me to conclude that there was no consent or the consent was coerced. In either case a Motion to Suppress the search will likely be filed to try to get the searched declared unconstitutional. If there truly was consent to the search this fact will have some significance for Pratts as well. It will be argued that no one is likely to consent to a search under these circumstances unless he or she had absolutely no involvement with the underlying Drug Distribution Activities. Pratts legal road is a long one. This makes his decision to hire the right lawyer to defend him one of the most important of his life. He must start an aggressive defense right away.

Continue Reading

| by

In a somewhat rare move local authorities have charged Dilip, Navin and Ashok Patel, owners of a local Days Inn with a criminal complaint that they permitted immoral conduct at their Methuen, Massachusetts hotel. According to a report in the Lawrence Eagle Tribune the hotel has been catering to drug usage, permitting minors to drink alcohol and for Prostitution. For nearly a four month period the Methuen Police have filed about twenty complaints at the hotel against various people. Efforts of the authorities to meet with the Patels have been fruitless according to the report. The Methuen police chief went so far as to say that the motel owners will not meet with the police. Here is a summary of some of the incidents alleged to have occurred at the motel recently:

• An underage drinking party in February wherein nine people under the age of twenty one were summonsed into court for a criminal application
• A March prostitution sting following complaints from restaurant customers in the motel. The customers were offered sex for a fee. Investigating the complaint officers set up an undercover operation. They met with two women who offered their sexual services. Both were arrested. During the arrest Cocaine was found in their possession. Criminal charges followed. There is a suggestion that a backpage.com operation has been run out of that establishment
• A baby was delivered at the hotel in a room in April and found dead in the room
• An investigation at the motel disclosed that an individual was using the establishment to Derive Support from a Prostitute (Pimping). The pimp was allegedly Distributing Class E substances as well
• There have been thefts from the bar at the hotel
• There have been fight in the bar resulting in Assault and Battery charges issuing
• There have been arrests made in the motel parking lot for Drug Distribution

• There have been charges of Domestic Assault and Battery filed as a result of incidents at the motel
• There was a death resulting from a drug overdose at the hotel
Read Article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1517686290/Police-Methuen-hotel-a-hotbed-for-criminals

It appears that the district attorney will prosecute this case under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 140 Section 26. That law permits the prosecution of anyone who knowingly permits his motel to be used for “immoral solicitation” or “immoral conduct”. A conviction for this charge can result in a one year jail sentence. This crime is a misdemeanor. The defendants’ Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer will likely defend this case by arguing that the defendants did not know what was going on in their motel and that they never permitted that type of conduct. This case will be difficult for the prosecution to win. The fact that the defendants refused to cooperate in the investigation cannot be used as evidence of their intent. It cannot be used as evidence at all. Attributing knowledge to the owners might also be difficult if they were rarely on the premises. This article suggests that the motel was managed by someone other than the owners. That suggests that they had no idea what was happening when these incidents allegedly took place. Getting a conviction for these charges will be difficult if not impossible.

Continue Reading

| by

The Brockton Enterprise reported that Theresa Foley of Stoughton, Massachusetts was arrested at her workplace following an investigation in which police allegedly witnessed her sell drugs on six separate days. The investigation began earlier this month when a Dedham Police Detective gained information that Foley was dealing drugs. Police investigating the allegations set up surveillance. They witnessed Foley leave work, travel to nearby parking lots and engage in hand to hand sales. It is further alleged that Foley was observed selling drugs from her home as well. Armed with this information the police followed Foley one last time. Following her established pattern she was seen selling to a man in a pickup truck. The man, a resident of Norwood was stopped by the police. In his possession they found a couple of bags of heroin. The purchaser was charged with Possession of Heroin and Conspiracy. Foley was then arrested. She has been charged with Conspiracy, Distribution of Heroin, a School Zone Violation and Possession of Class A With Intent to Distribute. The case in pending in the Dedham District Court. Foley was also found in possession of Drug Paraphernalia. It is reported that she confessed to these crimes.

Read Article:

http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/cops_and_courts/x157799408/Police-Stoughton-woman-caught-dealing-drugs-on-lunch-break

Theresa Foley.jpg

Dedham Drug Crimes Defense Attorney

The strength of the district attorney’s case here lies in what Foley possessed when she was arrested, as well as in her confession. While observing the sales might constitute circumstantial evidence that she was involved in drug dealing it would not be enough to sustain a conviction if that was the only evidence in the case. I have blogged on this before. When someone is seen selling drugs and the buyers are caught with the drugs the prosecution cannot usually prove the sale. This is because the buyer has a constitutional right not to testify due to his or her involvement in the criminal activity. Thus, if the buyer is himself not caught with drugs in his possession there is not nexus between the seller and buyer sufficient to sustain the prosecution. Simply put, the district attorney needs the buyer’s cooperation, something that is extremely rare. However, the police observation certainly gives rise to reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk the seller. If the seller is found in possession of the drugs the prosecution then becomes more viable.

Continue Reading

| by

According to the Brockton Enterprise, Jesse Sheridan of Norton, Massachusetts has been arrested and charged with Drug Trafficking, Possession With Intent to Distribute Marijuana and Possession With Intent to Distribute Oxycodone. The article states that Sheridan was arrested after a “months-long investigation”, the specifics of which were not disclosed. The charges are pending in the Taunton District Court however it is likely that this case will be prosecuted in the Bristol County Superior Court.

Read Article:

http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/cops_and_courts/x1292319642/Norton-police-seize-170-oxycodone-pills-from-Village-Way-condominium

So what exactly is Oxycodone? It is a prescription drug advertised and prescribed to relieve moderate to severe pain. It comes in liquid and tablet forms. It is a highly addictive drug. It can be habit-forming. Studies suggest that Oxycodone addicts have a tendency to turn to heroin as a cheaper alternative once their prescriptions run out or they are unable to pay for the drug. Oxycontin pills with 80 milligram strength can sell for as much as one hundred dollars per pill on the streets. Heroin on the other hand can be accessed in small yet temporarily satisfying quantities for under ten dollars per hit. Prosecutors in Massachusetts understand the dangers of Oxycodone and they endeavor to punish the dealers with stiff, unforgiving sentences. It is at times the job of the Massachusetts Drug Trafficking Defense Lawyer to educate the prosecutors and sometimes the judges that not all of these dealers are in it for a profit. Many sell these drugs simply to support their unfortunately severe habits. The trafficking operations of these people are often shoddy and disorganized. Their motives, i.e. to satisfy their habits will be obvious. In these situations, if the case is not suitable for trial or a successful Motion to Suppress plea negotiations come into play. Here is where the experience of your lawyer becomes critical.

Continue Reading