Articles Posted in Firearms

Emmanuel Mieles of Lawrence, Massachusetts has been charged with carrying a firearm, possession of a firearm, resisting arrest, underage possession of alcohol and discharging a firearm within one hundred feet of a highway. The twenty year old Massachusetts resident was sought by police who were dispatched to a pizza restaurant. When officers arrived Mieles pulled out a handgun, fled the scene and was observed throwing the weapon over a fence. When Mieles was apprehended police detected an odor of alcohol on his breath. They also found a .22 caliber handgun with an expended casing remaining in the weapon.

Lawrence Massachusetts Man Facing Gun Charges

Of all the criminal charges Mieles is facing the most serious is the charge of carrying a firearm. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 10(a) is the governing statute in this case. A conviction of that statute requires a minimum mandatory eighteen month house of correction sentence. The charge of discharging a firearm within one hundred fifty feet of a highway carries a maximum thirty day sentence with no minimum. That charge will be difficult to prove if the prosecutor does not have any witnesses who can testify when and where the weapon was fired and that the defendant was the person who fired the weapon.

Massachusetts prosecutors all take gun cases very seriously and endeavor to obtain convictions that require anyone convicted to serve the minimum mandatory sentence.

Continue Reading

Boston, Massachusetts police officers were just doing their job. They saw occupants of two cars engaged in a verbal dispute. The officers went over to settle the parties down. As they did one of four people riding in a Honda pulled out a firearm and shot at the officers. One officer fired back hitting the car. Other officer went into the car to apprehend the suspect. That man, John Mentor, now stands charged with assault with intent to murder. The defendant’s lawyer claimed that the officers fired several shots, a claim that has been denied by the Boston Police Department. The case is currently in the West Roxbury District Court pending indictment. Bail has been set at $500,000.

Man Charged With After Trying To Shoot Boston Police Officer

There is virtually no chance that this case will remain in the district court even though both the district court and the superior court have jurisdiction over these charges. Prosecutors view gun cases, particularly those where the weapon is discharged as extremely serious. Shooting at police officers compounds matters for this defendant. I will bet that the district attorney’s office will recommend at least a ten year state prison sentence for this defendant. If a judge agrees that that length sentence is warranted the defendant will either have to take the offer or try the case. It appears that defense counsel in this case has suggested that self-defense might be raised. Ballistics evidence at the crime scene and an examination of the police officers’ firearms will partially determine the viability of that defense.

Continue Reading

Eric Sideri owns Angela’s Coal Fired Pizza in Tyngsboro, Massachusetts. On Saturday night he and his manager Al Guevara pistol whipped and beat an employee Sideri believed stole twenty thousand dollars from the business. According to reports Sideri left the business sometime Saturday night seemingly in a bad mood. Guevara, who manages another one of Sideri’s stores came into the establishment. Shortly after the business closed Guevara told the cleaning crew to leave the property. Guevara started to count the evening’s take when Sideri re-arrived and began accusing the victim of taking his money. Sideri then proceeded to beat the victim with the bat. Sideri then tied the victim’s hands behind his back, withdrew two guns and threatened to blow his brains out. Sideri then stuck the larger of the two guns in the employee’s mouth and threatened to kill him. Sideri and Guevara then allowed the victim to leave the store. The victim called the police and his girlfriend and went to the hospital for treatment of his injuries. Sideri was arrested at his home. A warrant has been issued for Guevara’s arrest. Sideri has been charged in the Lowell Distict Court with three counts of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, threatening to commit the crime of murder, larceny of a motor vehicle and kidnapping.

Read Article: Pizza Restaurant Owner Charged With Kidnapping, A & B Dangerous Weapon

In the context of this case the most serious charges are the kidnapping and assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon. Kidnapping is prohibited by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 26. The maximum sentence after conviction is ten years in state prison unless a firearm was used in the commission of the offense or serious bodily injury resulted. Since no firearm was recovered it is impossible to prove the enhancement provision of this statute. Serious bodily injury is defined as “bodily injury which results in a permanent disfigurement, protracted loss or impairment of a bodily function, limb or organ or substantial risk of death.” It does not appear that that provision is implicated in this case either. Assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon is a crime pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 15A. This too is punishable by up to ten years in state prison unless aggravating circumstances accompany the act. That is not the case here.

Continue Reading

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

Steven Mai and William Blundell are getting arraigned in the Lynn District Court today stemming from their involvement in criminal activity in Lynn on Saturday night.  Apparently there was a party attended by fifty to sixty people, all of whom were identified as being Crip gang members or associates.  The party was hosted by Natasha Cedano at her home at 4 Summerset Court.  Complaints by neighbors of excessive noise and a female brandishing a gun prompted the arrival of police officers.  As officer approached the party they observed Mai wearing a shirt remembering a murdered Crip gang member.  Seeing the police Mai threw an object, later identified as a .35 caliber handgun into some bushes.  He was charged criminally for possession of a firearm, possession of ammunition and disorderly conduct.  Blundell was at the party shouting obscenities as they arrived.  Blundell was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct and failing to disburse. 

Read Article:  http://www.itemlive.com/articles/2009/02/10/news/news18.txt

Crips are a violent street gang that started in the late 1960’s in Los Angeles, California.  The two co-founders are now dead.  Raymond Washington was murdered in 1979.  Tookie William was executed in San Quentin Prison years after having been convicted and sentenced to death.  There are over 30,000 Crip gang members operating throughout the country.  The Lynn Crip gang is known as the Avenue King Crips. 

The most serious charge here is the gun possession case against Mai.  If convicted he faces a minimum mandatory 18 months in jail pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 10

Continue Reading

Even though Paul Mateiko has a license to carry firearms he does not have the right to possess a machine gun.  Worcester Police actually found multiple machine guns when they searched Mateiko’s home Saturday night.  These weapons along with 79 other firearms, thousands of rounds of ammunition and explosive devices were enough to convince a Worcester District Court Clerk Magistrate to impose bail in the amount of $15,000 for the defendant.  Makeito was charged with four counts of illegal possession of a machine gun and one count of unlawful possession of an infernal machine.

Read Entire Article:  http://cms.firehouse.com/web/online/News/Massachusetts-Crews-Make-Explosive-Find-/46$62661

The crimes charged are as follows:

1.  Possession of an infernal machine.  This is prohibited by Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 266 Section 102A.  That statute makes it a crime to possess any device that can danger life or property by fire or explosion.  There is a possible 10 year prison sentence that can be imposed for anyone convicted of this crime.  Massachusetts case law makes clear that the device must be something which is made.  It cannot just exist of a single element of the device.  It must consist of more than one part in order to be a device, instrument or machine. 

2.  Possession of a machine gun.  Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 10 makes it a crime to possess a machine gun.  A conviction for this offense carries a minimum mandatory 18 months in the house of correction. 

Continue Reading

At 2:00 this morning in Somerville, 32 year old Marcel Laurol of Malden man was shot by a 25 year old man from Brockton.  Laurol then hijacked a taxicab and drove it into his attacker.  Both of these guys are going to need good defense lawyers.

According to the BostonChannel Laurol was shot in the leg near Elm Street and Herbert Street.  He then jumped into a taxicab, assaulted the driver, hijacked his passengers and drove down Chester Street.  Laurol then drove into the Brockton man (the shooter) injuring his arms and head.  The cab then struck a nearby building. 

Laurol was charged with kidnapping, carjacking, assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon, reckless operation of a motor vehicle and operating with a revoked driver’s license.  Apparently the police were unable to locate and identify the taxicab’s passengers. 

Read Full Article:  http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/18668109/detail.html

Carjacking in Massachusetts is a crime under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 21A.  That law states that anyone whoever “with intent to steal a motor vehicle, assaults, confines, maims or puts any person in fear for the purpose of stealing a motor vehicle shall” is guilty of carjacking.  You do not have to actually steal the car to be found guilty so long as you intended to do so.  There is a maximum 15 year prison sentence for anyone convicted of this offense.  If the crime is committed by someone who is armed with a dangerous weapon the maximum sentence increases to 20 years.  If the offense is committed with a firearm there is a 5 year minimum sentence. 

Continue Reading

On January 23, 2009 Barnstable and Yarmoutth police along with a Brockton K-9 officer executed a search warrant at 55 Nautical Way, the home of Kenneth and Denzel Chisholm.  In the course of doing so officers located and seized 2,000 oxycodone pills valued at $60,000 a couple of guns and $15,000 cash.  The search warrant was sought out after police received information that the Chisholm brothers were in possession of particular caliber firearms identical to firearms used in an earlier shooting of two men.  Also located during the search was some cocaine, marijuana, narcotics packaging paraphernalia and a police scanner. 

Authorities described the defendants as major players involved in drug trafficking crimes and violent crimes.  Both men were initially charged with trafficking oxycodone in excess of 200 grams, possession of a firearm (defaced serial number), possession with the intent to distribute a class D substance and possession of ammunition.  Charges are pending in the  Barnstable District Court until the defendants are indicted. 

Read Entire Article: 

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090123/NEWS11/90123025

So exactly what does this mean for the Chisholm brothers.  That is a good question.  The big case is the trafficking carrying a minimum mandatory 15 year state prison sentence.  Search warrant cases such as this one always raise the question “Whose drugs were these?”.  Massachusetts law makes clear that someone’s presence at a crime scene without more is not sufficient to establish his guilt.  This is so even if the defendant knew about the crime and took no steps to prevent it.  The district attorney must prove that the defendant intentionally participated in committing that crime, not that he was just there or knew about it.  Thus, there is no guilty by association in Massachusetts.  In order to convict the prosecutor is going to have to show that that both defendants had the intent to possess the oxycodone with the intent to distribute the same.  That can be accomplished through statements made by the defendants, the location of the drugs or trafficking related paraphernalia in the home, fingerprints on the drugs or its packaging.  There are many other ways to prove that the defendants engaged in a joint venture and many ways to defend against these allegations. 

Continue Reading

This past Wednesday, Ricardo Calvo of Worcester was sentenced to fifteen years in federal prison for being a felon in possession of a firearm.  The defense was looking for a seventy seven month prison sentence based on his lawyer’s representation that Calvo had a history of substance abuse, physical abuse and emotional abuse since he was a child.  According to defense counsel Victoria Bonilla, Calvo was introduced to drugs by his father at the age of 12.  The prosecution argued that the defendant’s lengthy criminal history was reason enough not to depart from the 15 year mandatory minimum sentence. 

The defendant was arrested in December of 2005 along with sixty other people as part of a federal crime sweep.  When he was apprehended police found him in possession of a .22 caliber pistol, magazine and ammunition.  

Read Entire Article:  http://www.telegram.com/article/20090205/NEWS/902050969/1008/NEWS02

Calvo was most likely charged with a violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g) making it a crime for anyone who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to possess a firearm.  The sentence associated with a conviction of this crime is a maximum of 10 years in federal prison.  So, for Calvo to have been sentenced to 15 years there must have been an armed career criminal enhancement.  To be enhanced the defendant in this case must have been convicted of three prior felonies for serious drugs or violence. 

Victoria Bonilla is an excellent experienced Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer who unquestionably did a great job for her client.  The federal courts are a tough place to defend people accused of committing crimes.  The defense victories are difficult to come by and success in this forum is a relative term.

Continue Reading

Assistant United States Attorney Suzanne Sullivan’s reputation took a severe blow last week when Jonathan Saltzman from the Boston Globe reported that Chief District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf threatened sanctions for Sullivan’s failure to provide exculpatory evidence to defense counsel.  According to the article, the veteran prosecutor failed to disclose that a Boston Police officer offered testimony in court that was contradicted by what he told Sullivan beforehand.  In a lengthy memorandum Wolf wrote that “The court assumes that her failure to disclose material, exculpatory information was not intentional, in part because Sullivan produced her notes for the court’s in camera inspection,” Wolf wrote. “Nevertheless, the violations were clear and inexcusable. If the error by an experienced prosecutor was inadvertent, it seems only to be explained by ignorance of, or utter indifference to, the constitutional duty she repeatedly claimed to have understood and obeyed.”  In another part of the memorandum Sullivan’s actions were referred to as an “egregious failure” to disclose materially exculpatory evidence. 

This notwithstanding, the arrest and evidence obtained against the defendant was found to be made in a constitutional manner.  The defendant is charged with firearms related activity

Read Entire Article:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/01/27/judge_chastises_federal_attorney/?page=full

About two to three years ago I had a case against Suzanne Sullivan.  At that time she was an assistant district attorney in the Plymouth County District Attorney’s office.  The case involved multiple counts of sexual abuse of several children.  I was the second defense lawyer on the case.  Ms. Sullivan had inherited the case from another prosecutor who had just left the district attorney’s office to join the United States Attorney’s Office.  I personally found Ms. Sullivan to be extremely professional.  She promptly provided me with all discovery materials.  She even went so far as to invite me down to her office to view her file.  I accepted her invitation.  She gave me a couple of large boxes full of police reports, grand jury minutes, witness statements, exhibits and more.  She even left her notes of interviews with witnesses in the box for me to review and photocopy.  I was permitted to view this material in a private room, unsupervised.  Ms. Sullivan gave me access to a copy machine and made sure that I was able to obtain copies of all materials I wanted.  We later tried the case.  Suzanne Sullivan’s hospitality and professional congeniality continued in the same manner.  She never personalized the case, prosecuted with a passion and conducted herself in a dignified manner.  That case was and remains my only contact with this prosecutor.  Her ethics and professionalism are, in my opinion unparalleled.   

The rule in federal courts is similar to that In Massachusetts state courts as they relate to prosecutorial misconduct.  Dismissal with prejudice “is a draconian sanction that must be reserved for cases manifesting egregious prosecutorial misconduct or a serious threat of prejudice to the defendant.”  Even dismissals without prejudice are rare and not used absent “some demonstrable prejudice to the defendant.”  Our courts prefer alternative sanctions such as a fine or a report to the Board of Bar Overseers.  On appeal there are times when prosecutorial misconduct results in a reversal of the conviction and a new trial. 

Continue Reading