Articles Posted in Drug Crimes

| by

Easton, Massachusetts police detectives had been watching Stephen King for some time. This past Wednesday night their investigation culminated in his arrest. According to reports law enforcement agencies had information that King had been involved in cocaine trafficking in Bristol County. This information was sufficient for them to obtain search warrants for King’s home at an Easton Mobile Home Park and for a storage locker that he was renting. An execution of those search warrants uncovered approximately thirty thousand dollars worth of cocaine and nine thousand dollars cash. King was later located at a supermarket parking lot in Sharon. He had in his possession individually packaged bundles of cocaine and over two thousand dollars cash. King was charged with trafficking cocaine, possession with the intent to distribute cocaine, conspiracy and a school zone violation.

Cocaine Trafficking Charges In Store For Easton Man

Man Faces Cocaine Trafficking Charges In Bristol County

A couple of things immediately come to mind when reading these articles. 1) What information did the police have that enabled them to obtain search warrants for King’s home and storage locker and 2) what was their probable cause to arrest him in the supermarket parking lot.

Quite often the strength of the district attorney’s case for drug crimes lies with the constitutionality of the search warrant. If a search warrant is defective the search becomes invalid and the items seized during the search or going to be suppressed. Many times this leaves the prosecutor without a case against the defendant. Defense attorneys challenge the issuance of search warrants through motions to suppress. Many drug cases are won by the defense through this procedural mechanism. It would be interesting to see exactly what the police put in their affidavits when the applied for the search warrants in this case. If the warrants should not have issued then the drugs will be excluded from this prosecution. Similarly, King’s arrest may be found unconstitutional and the drugs found on him might be suppressed as well.

Continue Reading

| by

A one month long investigation into cocaine dealing in Malden and Everett resulted in the arrest of three locals. According to reports Jennifer Verderber, 21, of Medford George Graef, 33, and John Mazzeo, 27, both of Everett, have been charged with various drug crimes. It is alleged that Mazzeo and Verderber drove to the other defendant’s home and obtained from him a package containing cocaine. The two were followed and seen engaging a a drug transaction after which they were arrested. Police then went back to Graef’s home where they located and seized sixty grams of cocaine, nearly three thousand dollars cash, drug paraphernalia and scales. Graef was also arrested and charged with drug crimes. Charges are now pending in the Malden District Court.

Read Article: Three Getting Arraigned On Cocaine Charges In Malden District Court

The most serious charge all three might be facing is trafficking cocaine in excess of twenty eight grams, a violation of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 94C Section 32E. The district courts in Massachusetts do not have jurisdiction over trafficking cases so the matter will likely be prosecuted in the Middlesex County Superior Court in Woburn. There is a five year minimum mandatory sentence for anyone convicted of that crime. Based on the article, this case presents some interesting issues involving search and seizure law. Questions that come to mind are 1) did the police utilize and informant in this case, 2) to whom did Verderber and Mazzeo distribute drugs and what is that person’s role in this investigation, if any, 3) what probable cause did the police have to enter Graeff’s house, or how did they in fact gain entry. All three of these defendants might have some very strong defenses to these charges.

Continue Reading

| by

Several weeks ago DEA and Andover, Massachusetts police received information from a source that Jay Keough and Ryan Emmet were cooking up methamphetamine at Keough’s parents’ home on Lowell Street in Andover. Apparently Keough and Emmett had been buying cold medicine containing pseudoephedrine from drug stores in the Merrimack Valley towns of Andover, Methuen, North Andover, Lawrence and Haverhill. Various “cooking” techniques break the medicine down into ephedrine which in turn is used in the manufacturing of methamphetamine or “crystal meth”. According to reports Keough manufactured the substance every 4-5 days in a first floor room that was locked, chained and guarded by a Rottweiller. Both Keough and Emmet were charged in federal court with conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. Both men are being detained pending a hearing.

Read Article: Massachusetts Men Caught In Their Andover Meth Lab Charged In Federal Court

Both defendants have been charged with a violation of 21 U.S.C. Section 846 and 21 U.S.C. Section 841(a)(1). 21 U.S.C. 846 makes it a crime to conspire to violate any of the laws of the drug abuse prevention and control act. 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) makes it a crime to manufacture, distribute or possess with the intent to distribute a controlled substance. Methamphetamine is a controlled substance in accordance with Schedule II of the act. If convicted on these charges, Keough and Emmet each face up to 20 years imprisonment, to be followed by 3 years of supervised release and a $ 1,000,000 fine.

Continue Reading

| by

Amesbury, Massachusetts police had their work cut out for them early Saturday morning when they stopped a 2002 Pontiac sedan operating erratically on Route 110. When Officer David Noyes activated his lights the car’s four occupants started behaving strangely. When he contacted the driver he noticed the smell of alcohol coming from inside the vehicle. Noyes quickly learned that the driver had a warrant out of the Newburyport District Court for an OUI conviction and that he was operating on a revoked driver’s license. The passengers had become unruly and Noyes called for assistance. The responding officers patted down the passengers and conducted a search of the car. During the search the police located a loaded semi-automatic firearm. A small bag of cocaine was found on one of the passengers and two additional bags were located in the car. All four had criminal records including cocaine distribution, larceny of a motor vehicle, robbery and possession of a dangerous weapon. Three of the subjects had pending criminal cases in other courts.

As a result of this incident several charges were filed in the Newburyport District Court including carrying a firearm, possession of ammunition, possession of cocaine, OUI second offense, driving with a revoked license, open container violation and minor in possession of alcohol. Bail for each was set at $25,000 pending arraignment.

Read Article: Boston Men Charged With Drug, Gun Violations, OUI Second After Routine Traffic Stop

Of all the charges these guys are facing the most serious is the gun possession charge. In Massachusetts possession of a firearm is proscribed by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter Section 10. The law states that anyone who carries a firearm without being properly licensed to do so is guilty of a felony. There is a mandatory minimum eighteen month sentence that you must serve if you are convicted of this crime. The firearm charges in this case might be very difficult for the prosecution to prove. All four defendants are charged with possessing the gun. This is because the police were unable to determine who actually possessed the weapon. While there can be a joint venture theory used by the prosecution to attribute possession to all defendants the likelihood of getting convictions of this basis is slim.

Recently in Essex County the district attorney’s office has been fingerprinting firearms in cases such as this. If the prints match up to one of the occupants in the car a conviction against that person becomes more likely. Essex County has a gun court now held in Peabody. This might be where this case is ultimately prosecuted.

Continue Reading

| by

Brian Sewall is 58 years old and in 1992 he was convicted of sexually assaulting two boys. He was living on Main Street in Peabody, Massachusetts in September. Peabody and Salem police learned of his whereabouts in September and began looking for him after hearing that he was frequently observed in the company of a fifteen year old boy. Authorities found him on leaning into a car in what reports suggest was some sort of drug related activity. He was arrested for illegal possession of narcotics. When police learned that he had not registered as a sex offender he was charged with that crime too. The defendant was sentenced to six months in the house of correction for the sex offender violation. He has an outstanding warrant in New Hampshire for the same offense. Sewall has been charged with this crime at least four other times in Massachusetts. Other criminal convictions for the defendant include larceny, fraud, DUI and more.

Read Article: Peabody Sex Offender Sentenced In Salem Superior Court

The crime of failing to register as a sex offender in Massachusetts is governed by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 6 Section 178H. The law states that anyone who fails to register after having been convicted of particular designated sex offenses is guilty of a crime. For a first offense the law requires a minimum six month jail sentence. For second and subsequent offenders the punishment is a minimum five years in prison.

Continue Reading

| by

In a 4-2 decision the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a Superior Court judge’s decision to suppress a search made pursuant to a warrant. As a backdrop, the defendant in this case filed a motion to suppress cocaine, marijuana and drug related paraphernalia seized in his home during the execution of a search warrant. The search warrant was issued in reliance on a police officer’s affidavit. The affidavit stated:

1. That an informant told the officer that he had been buying cocaine from the defendant. The informant provided the defendant’s address. Police corroborated that this was the defendant’s address.
2. The informant told the officer that in order to buy drugs from the defendant he would call the defendant and arrange a location and time for the deal.
3. Using this information the officer set up a controlled buy. Surveillance watched the defendant leave his home and meet the informant at the predetermined location. Undercover officers witnessed the transaction.
4. The officer concluded that in his experience the defendant’s manner of operation was consistent with drug dealers’ tactics designed to evade law enforcement by changing times and delivery locations and that in these situations the drug dealers use their homes to store the narcotics.

Three days later the officer applied for and obtained the search warrant.

Citing earlier cases, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that when the target location of a search warrant “is a residence, there must be specific information in the affidavit, and reasonable inferences a magistrate may draw, to provide ‘a sufficient nexus between the defendant’s drug-selling activity and his residence to establish probable cause to search the residence.'” The Court continued that “Information establishing that a person is guilty of a crime does not necessarily constitute probable cause to search the person’s residence.” On these facts the Court concluded that there was no “particularized information based on police surveillance or otherwise, that would permit a reasonable inference that the defendant likely kept a supply of drugs in his apartment.” One single observation of the defendant driving from his home to the location of the drug deal was insufficient to establish probable cause in this case.

See Commonwealth v. Pina, Slip Opinion, SJC-10240 March 19, 2009.

A large majority of drug cases handled by criminal defense lawyers involve search and seizure issues. Motions to suppress can result in judges excluding evidence unlawfully seized by law enforcement officials. The result is often a dismissal of all charges in that the district attorney is unable to go forward without the items seized.

Continue Reading

| by

MIT Police Officer Joseph D’Amelio was arrested Saturday night on charges of trafficking oxycontins.  Yesterday he was arraigned in the East Boston District Court and held on five hundred thousand dollars cash bail.  His cousin and co-defendant Anthony Cristallo was arrested and charged with these drug crimes as well.  According to reports a local Federal Express office opened a package sent from Florida believed to contain drugs.  Once the drugs were located Massachusetts State Police were notified.  An undercover trooper posing as a Federal Express employee then delivered the package to its intended location where it was signed for by an individual named Smoot.  Smoot called D’Amelio who arrived and checked the pills.  He in turn called Cristallo who showed up with sixteen thousand dollars he paid to Smoot for the pills.  All three were arrested. 

Read Article:  Cop Charged With Trafficking Oxycontins

Press Release:  High Bail Set For 2 Caught Trafficking

Drug Trafficking in Massachusetts is the possession with the intent to distribute an illegal substance or the actual distribution of the drug at a threshold quantity.  All trafficking offenses in Massachusetts carry in minimum sentence.  The threshold for trafficking class A and class B substances is fourteen grams.  There are many defenses to the charge of trafficking in Massachusetts.  Affirmative defenses depend on the circumstances of the case.  Often times district attorney’s offices in Massachusetts enter into plea bargains wherein case dispositions can be negotiated to something below the established mandatory sentence. 

Continue Reading

| by

On Thursday police in Cape Cod, Massachusetts executed a search warrant at an apartment in Brewster.  This came on the heals of a lengthy investigation involving police from Brewster, Orleans and a Cape Cod Drug Task Force.  The result was the arrest of the residents of the apartment and a Chatham man.  During the raid officers seized approximately five hundred dollars worth of cocaine and four thousand dollars cash.  The two residents of the home were charged with possession of heroin with intent to distribute, possession of  heroin with intent to distribute in a school zone, and conspiracy to violate drug laws. The Chatham man was charged with possession of heroin and possession of cocaine.  The cases are pending in the Orleans District Court. 

Read Article:  Raid On Cape Cod Apartment Results In Drug Charges

Unless the case is indicted to the Superior Court the most serious charge any defendant is facing is the school zone violation.  The Massachusetts school zone statute is Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 94C Section 32 J.  The law states that anyone who is convicted of either trafficking or possession with the intent to distribute or the actual distribution of controlled substances while within one thousand feet of a school zone must serve a minimum mandatory two year house of correction sentence.  There is no early parole associated with this sentence.  It is not a defense to these charges that the defendant did not know that he was in a school zone. 

Recently, there have been efforts in Massachusetts to rescind this statute.  Lawmakers have acknowledged that the statute as written exceeds its designed intent to punish those who sell on school property or to school aged children on school grounds.  The consequences of this law work disparately between people who live in the inner city and those who live in suburbs or more rural areas. 

Continue Reading

| by

Deivy Rosario is a 27 year old Lawrence, Massachusetts man living on East Haverhill Street.  He has been indicted in New Hampshire and charged with conspiracy to sell heroin and intimidation of a witness.  According to reports, Rosario contacted a police officer who was instrumental in an earlier arrest of Rosario’s brother for heroin trafficking activities.  Rosario contacted the officer late last year indicating that he wanted a “face-to-face” meeting because his brother told him to “look her up”.  The brother, Luis Peguro-Tejada was arrested and charged last year after police seized three hundred twenty seven grams of heroin and $14,000 from his apartment. 

Rear Article:  Massachusetts Heroin Dealer Charged In New Hampshire

Intimidation of a witness in Massachusetts is a criminal act pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 268 Section 13B.  The law states that anyone who directly or indirectly, threatens or attempts to cause or causes injury to someone who may be a witness in a criminal proceeding is guilty of the crime of intimidation of a witness.  There is a possible ten year prison sentence for a conviction of this crime in Massachusetts making this a felony.  In Massachusetts and most states this crime is taken very seriously.  Prosecutors make a strong effort to protect witnesses, particularly police officers who are threatened in connection with their duties.  Typically, the more “real” the threat the more serious the punishment will be if the defendant is convicted. 

Continue Reading

| by

A pharmacist at a Framingham drug store noticed that two bottles of oxycontins, each containing one hundred pills was missing from the store.  He called the Framingham Police.  It turns out that Igor Minevich, a 23 year old pharmacy technician who had been working at the store for less than three weeks had taken the drugs.  He turned himself in to the police station and admitted to taking the pills.  Minevich also told the police that all of the pills were gone and that he had given them all to friends.  The defendant was charged with trafficking oxycontins and possession with the intent to distribute oxycontins.  The case is pending in the Framingham District Court.  Minevich was released on personal recognizance. 

Read Article:  Pharmacy Technician Who Stole Oxycontins Charged With Trafficking

Oxycontin is a class B substance substance in Massachusetts.  Trafficking class B substances is a felony pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 94C Section 32E.  A conviction carries a minimum mandatory sentence that varies depending on the weight of the substance that was trafficked.  Trafficking in Massachusetts is simply the possession with the intent to distribute or actual distribution of a controlled substance that exceeds a threshold weight.  In this case the defendant admitted to distributing the substance.  If it is determined that he distributed a quantity that meets the trafficking minimum he will have a tough fight ahead of him.  If however the evidence shows that much of this substance was for personal use and the quantity distributed was minimal the defendant might have a legitimate defense to the trafficking charge.  The article suggests that Minevich was using this substance.  This is corroborated by the statement of the pharmacist who reported the theft of the oxycontins to the police. 

Continue Reading