Justia Lawyer Rating
Super Lawyers Badge
Avvo Badge
Massachusetts Bar Association
Top-Rated Lawyer

| by

Derek Blumenthal and Christopher Chamberlain both of Brockton are being held at the Bristol County Jail.  They are charged with extortion by threat of injury and witness intimidation.  It is alleged that they made threats to a Brockton dentist’s family and tried to extort money from them.  According to reports in the Brockton Enterprise, the defendants were driving by the victim’s Easton home every ten minutes demanding four hundred dollars for money purportedly owed for drugs.  The men made threatening calls from their cell phone, telling the dentist’s wife that if she did not pay the money that her son owed they would go “into the house and beat her beyond recognition”.  More calls had been made earlier in the day and messages were left with the dentist’s answering service in Raynham and Dorchester.  Over 20 calls were made altogether.  

Read Article:   http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/x1177286299/Two-Brockton-men-charged-with-extortion

So what are these guys looking at? 

1.  Extortion:  The Massachusetts statute making this a crime in Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 25.  The law prohibits anyone from communicating a threat to someone else with the intent to extort money from that person.  A conviction can carry a prison sentence of up to 15 years if the case in prosecuted in the superior court.  If the reports are correct this case was properly charged.

2.  Witness Intimidation:  Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 268 Section 13B sets out the criteria for witness intimidation.  If you threaten someone who is a potential witness in a criminal case you can be found guilty of this charge and sentenced for up to ten years in prison.  The article does not make clear how these two men are in violation of this statute.

I would bet that these cases remain in the district court given the absence of any physical harm to the victims.  If that is the case both defendants face no more than 2 1/2 years in the Bristol County House of Correction.

Continue Reading

| by

According to the Somerville Journal, Last week Vincent Primo and his girlfriend, Kim Szathmary, both of Medford were indicted by a Middlesex County Grand Jury for robbery and attempted robbery in Cambridge and Somerville.  In November and December of 2008 there were 7 incidents of attempted robbery and robbery in the Somerville and Cambridge area.  The crimes were similar in that a male would take women’s handbags from them forcible, and on one occasion a victim was stabbed.  The crimes occurred near public transportation stations.  Surveillance cameras captured Szathmary using the victim’s credit cards.  Primo was identified through photographic arrays.  Both defendants were indicted on four counts of robbery, armed and unarmed, two counts of armed assault with the intent to rob, assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon, armed assault with intent to murder and credit card fraud.  Somerville District Court Judge Maurice Flynn set bail in the amount of $500 for Szathmary and he held Primo without bail. 

Read Article: http://www.wickedlocal.com/somerville/news/x84117951/Medford-couple-arrested-for-stabbings-robberies-in-Somerville-Cambridge

Perhaps the most serious crime with which the couple have been charged is armed robbery.  Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 17 states that anyone who is armed with a dangerous weapon uses the weapon to effectuate a theft from the victim is guilty of armed robbery.  The maximum sentence for armed robbery is life in prison.  Unarmed robbery in Massachusetts has the same elements as armed robbery with the exception that there is no dangerous weapon involved.  Unarmed robbery also carries a life sentence.  It looks like lawyers for the defendants in this case have a tough fight ahead of them. 

Continue Reading

| by

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

| by

Juan Fernandez of Lynn, Massachusetts was arraigned in the Attleboro District Court after being charged with drunk driving (DUI), leaving the scene of an accident, possession with intent to distribute controlled substances and operating to endanger.  All of this stems from a collision last Saturday morning involving Fernandez and a Massachusetts Police Officer.  Apparently, at 4:50 in the morning Fernandez was driving the wrong way on Interstate 95 near Route 123.  His car struck a police cruiser who was attempting to stop him from operating in the wrong direction.  It was reported that Fernandez was so drunk that when questioned by police he did not know where he was. 

Read Article:  http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2009/02/10/news/4390515.txt

Massachusetts district attorneys look at drunk driving in two contexts.  One is based on the police officer’s observations of the defendant at the time he or she is stopped.  The officer considers the manner of operation of the vehicle, the suspect’s physical appearance, the odor of alcohol, physical behavior and the performance of field sobriety tests.  These subjective criteria help the police form opinions as to sobriety or impairment.  The second context in which prosecutors look at drunk driving cases involves an “illegal per se” operation of a motor vehicle.  Massachusetts and all other states have adopted a rule that anyone operating with a blood alcohol of .08 percent or higher is guilty of drunk driving.  There is an overlap between an officer’s observations and the illegal per se view of this crime.

Many drunk driving cases are defensible.  Police officers’ subjective opinions are often countered by reasonable explanations for certain behavior.  For instance, officers typically use the expression “unsteady on his feet” to support their opinion that someone was intoxicated.  Many times however the defendant will have a physical defect or problem that causes a certain gait.  Another common phrase used by the police at trial is “slurred speech”.  This can be explained by certain impediments or accents particular to the suspect.  Unless the officer knows the person he has no way of knowing if the speech pattern is the effect of alcohol or the individual’s particular speech pattern. 

Continue Reading

| by

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

| by

According to The Lawrence Eagle Tribune, a twenty-eight year old Lawrence man is accused of repeatedly whipping his step daughter on her back with a belt. As a result of the beating, the young girl developed welts on her back that were observed by a teacher and the school nurse. According to the paper, the child reported to the police that the beating occurred because she told her stepfather that she took $100.00 from her mother’s wallet to buy a present for her teacher. The defendant was arrested and charged with assault and battery on a family member, assault and battery on a child under 14 causing bodily injury and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The defendant was arraigned in the Lawrence District Court and $1000.00 bail was set. Upon his release he is not to have contact with his stepdaugher.

The girl reported that she heard her mother tell her step father that he could have punished her in a different way. According to the paper, the girl stated that her mother treated her injuries with lotion. However, the mother told the authorities that she did not observe the injuries.

Continue Reading

| by

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

| by

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

| by

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

| by

According to police Rayfield McCants, 28 of Cambridge, Massachusetts got onto an MBTA bus Tuesday night and intentionally rubbed himself against a woman passenger.  Afterwards, when the woman exited the bus McCants followed her and harassed her until a bus driver came to her aid.  McCants now stands charged with indecent assault and battery.  Apparently when McCants got on the bus he sat directly next to the woman even though the bus was virtually empty.  The bus driver witnessed the events on and off the bus and assisted the woman until the suspect was arrested by the police.  Bail in the amount of $5,000 cash was set. 

Read Full Article http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO103666/

The Massachusetts statute prohibiting indecent assault and battery is Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 13H.  The law states that anyone who is convicted of this crime can be punished for up to 5 years in state prison.  If the case is kept in the district court there is a maximum 2 1/2 year house of correction sentence that can be imposed.  Massachusetts courts define indecent assault as acts fundamentally offensive to today’s moral values.  Touching the buttocks or private areas of another certainly suffice to convict for this crime. 

Continue Reading