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

| by

Yesterday a Marblehead, Massachusetts man was arraigned on Child Pornography Charges in the Lynn District Court. The thirty three year old defendant was charged with Distribution of Child Pornography and Possession of Child Pornography. Authorities stated that an Essex County Internet Crimes Task Force identified the defendant in the course of one of its investigations. A Search Warrant was obtained and executed at his home. A computer was seized and searched. On it the police found about one hundred lime wire files depicting children engaged in pornographic acts. The basis of the distribution allegation centers on the use of a file sharing service. Bail was set in the amount of ten thousand dollars. The defendant’s lawyer asked that the case file be sealed pending a resolution of the case. He stated that a release of this information prior to trial would create irreparable harm regardless of the outcome of the case. The judge temporarily allowed the request citing non-compliance with the Massachusetts Uniform Impoundment laws.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Child Pornography Defense Lawyer

So what are the Massachusetts Uniform Impoundment Rules? In Massachusetts a party is allowed to file a motion for the impoundment of certain materials provided the motion states sufficient grounds and is supported by an affidavit. The motion must state with particularity the material the party seeks to impound. A time period for impoundment must be stated. The request for impoundment can be made prior to the filing of the objectionable material. In some instances third parties have the right to be heard in opposition to a motion to impound. Impoundment may be allowed only after a showing of “good cause”. Good cause contemplates the nature of this matter, the type of information that his being requested to be impounded, the reasons for the request and the interests of the community in general. Orders of impoundment may be modified. Appeals of these orders are brought before a single justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

An Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer would want to use this rule in a case like this one. The allegations against the defendant are heinous. Anytime a search of this defendant’s name is entered these charges and the article will appear regardless of the outcome of the case. Concealing the details of this case and the data identifying the defendant to these allegations is a great strategy particularly in cases where lawyers are confident that a favorable result will follow for their client. The problem however is that the public oftentimes has access to this material prior to the case being brought forward in court. This can make the application of the impoundment rules improbable.

Continue Reading

| by

Last year Joel Pimental of Lawrence, Massachusetts was arrested after he allegedly sold drugs to an undercover officer last year. He was charged with Trafficking Heroin. He posted fifty thousand dollars cash bail. He then defaulted. Yesterday, police officers observed Pimental going into a Weare Street apartment in Lawrence. He was arrested. The police then obtained a Search Warrant. When the warrant was executed officers found enough heroin to charge Trafficking Over 28 Grams of Heroin. They also found a gun. It is further alleged that Pimental has used at least four aliases and was charged with Drug Trafficking using at least one of these names. He is in default in several court in which he has been charged not only with Trafficking Heroin but Trafficking Cocaine, Drug Conspiracy, Assault and Battery and some Motor Vehicle related crimes. Pimental’s cases are pending in Middlesex County Superior Court in Woburn, the Lowell District Court, the Essex County Superior Court in Salem and the Lawrence District Court. Following yesterday’s arrest Pimental was charged with Trafficking Heroin, Felon in Possession of a Firearm and multiple other charges.

Read Article:

Experienced Massachusetts Drug Lawyer

Essex County Drug Trafficking Defense Counsel

Usually, when someone defaults on a large bail they return to their native country to avoid prosecution and possible prison time. The accused, being cognizant of the risks associated with defending the case flees the jurisdiction. They realize that if they later return to Massachusetts and get caught they will probably be held without bail until the underlying case in resolved. So they make the decision to stay clear of Massachusetts. Thus, I am always amazed when I read an article disclosing activity such as that attributed to Pimental. This is because getting caught often means that the defendant is going to get convicted and likely serve a long prison sentence. Obviously Pimental was confident that he would not get caught. His use of fictitious names in the past apparently served him well and he was able to post bail when necessary and continue his enterprises under another name. Now however he will not be given bail. He will be held without bail pending trial. He will be taken from county to county to have his cases resolved. Unless his Massachusetts Drug Crimes Defense Attorney is able to win these cases he will probably have to serve at least fifteen years in state prison. The inclusion of the gun charge might increase this number. Apparently the temporarily successful use of the aliases and the ability to post large cash bails gave the twenty five year old Pimental a sense of invincibility and enabled him to continue with his Massachusetts Drug Activities. It appears that right now he is in for a big fight.

Continue Reading

| by

Yesterday afternoon there was a shootout in the parking lot of a WalMart store in Avon, Massachusetts. Police have not yet disclosed the nature of the incident or its details yet three Brockton residents have been arrested. Ashley Weiner, Keenen Hart and Keshawne Murphy have all been charged with Possession of a Firearm and Conspiracy to Violate the Massachusetts Controlled Substances (Drug) Laws. Keenen, who was shot during the incident, was charged with Disorderly Person in addition to the other two charges. Weiner is also facing a charge of Carrying a Firearm and Murphy must defend a count of Discharging a Firearm near a highway as well as Assault and Battery by Means of a Dangerous Weapon. The cases are being prosecuted in the Stoughton District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Firearm Possession Defense Attorney

Brockton Drug Crimes Defense Lawyer

Despite the absence of certain information in this article one thing appears clear. Murphy shot Hart. It is Murphy alone who is charged with Assault and Battery by Means of a Dangerous Weapon. So it makes that at least for now the police believe that he shot Hart. The basis for this charge is not clear. It would make more sense if Murphy had been charged with Carrying a Firearm rather than Possession of a Firearm. There is a distinct legal difference between these two crimes. Carrying a Firearm in Massachusetts is a felony under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 10(a). That statute holds that anyone carrying a firearm without being properly licensed to do so must serve at least eighteen months in the house of correction or a state prison. There is another subsection to G.L. c. 269 §10 that does not require a mandatory jail sentence, that being G.L. c. 269 §10(h). The district attorney alone decides how to charge these cases. Usually, someone who is caught physically holding a gun is charged under 10(a), the mandatory minimum portion of the statute. Someone who is near someone with a gun and whom the prosecution thinks knew that the person had a gun gets charged under 10(h). I would have imagined that in this case Murphy, not Weiner would have been charged under 10(a). This can be explained perhaps after the shooting Weiner picked up the gun and concealed it to protect the shooter.

As a Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer, the Massachusetts Drug Conspiracy Charge always intrigues me. Anytime someone is “around” drugs yet not actually in physical possession of the drugs he or she gets charged with Conspiracy. The suggestion is that people who involve themselves with drug users or drug dealers in Massachusetts must be enabling them or facilitating their efforts so they must be charged as well. I can tell you that very few Drug Conspiracy cases in Massachusetts result in convictions particularly where the accused is represented by an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney.

Continue Reading

| by

Aaron Glenn Teixeira of Lynn, Massachusetts was arrested Monday pursuant to an arrest warrant. During his apprehension officers found two small bags of crack cocaine and one small bag of marijuana. The arrest took place within one hundred feet of a park or playground. Teixeira has been charged with a School Zone Violation and Possession With the Intent to Distribute a Class B Substance. The police were looking for the defendant as a result of an early report of an assault on one of his customers, a female crack cocaine user. The woman claimed that Teixeira came looking for money that she supposedly owed him for crack cocaine. When she refused to pay he assaulted her. She claims that the defendant kicked her in the chest and intimidated her when she attempted to contact the police. Apparently the assault was witnessed by another woman who was also one of Teixeira’s customers. Bail was set in the amount of one thousand dollars. The case is being prosecuted in the Lynn District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Drug Defense Lawyer, Cocaine Cases, School Zone Cases

The article goes on to say that the officers who arrested Teixeira saw two calls made to the defendant’s cell phone that involved the purchase of drugs. Absent this information I could confidently say that the felony charges, Possession With Intent would fail and this case would be resolved as a Possession case only. The added material suggests that Teixeira was selling drugs or at a minimum that he intended to sell the drugs. I am inclined to doubt the validity of that information. Here is why. How could the police officers observe “two calls made to Teixeira’s cell phone involving people trying to purchase drugs”? What did they see? Did they see Teixeira on the phone twice? If they did, what could they have heard the person on the other line saying? The answer is simple. Nothing. Any reasonable person would have difficulty believing testimony along these lines. It makes no sense. Rather, it appears that the officer who “heard” that discourse wants to make this case a felony when in fact it is only a misdemeanor at best. That being the case I would expect Teixeira’s Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer to look towards resolving this case as a possession case only. This suggestion is supported by Massachusetts case law. In Commonwealth v. Tripp, a 1982 case, the Massachusetts Appeals Court held that possession of eight bags of heroin by itself was insufficient to support a finding that the defendant intended to distribute the drugs. Here, the quantity of substances, two small bags of crack cocaine, is far smaller than that amount of drugs found in Tripp. This quantity of crack cocaine is more consistent with personal use.

Continue Reading

| by

According to a recent article in www.wickedlocal.com just a few days ago two women were arrested and charged with Prostitution or Sexual Conduct for a Fee. The arrest took place at a “spa” in Needham, Massachusetts located on Dedham Street. Members of a Norfolk County Anti-Crime Task Force effectuated the arrests after a relative lengthy investigation. Later that day the officers made a similar arrest at a facility in Quincy. The article reports that the officers were able to access the businesses in an undercover capacity. The facilities at which the women were arrested are not properly licensed massage parlors. The cases will be prosecuted in the Dedham District Court.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Sexual Conduct for a Fee Lawyer

Needham Prostitution Defense Attorney

Our office is retained on cases like this one regularly. This type of criminal activity in Massachusetts is becoming much more common in large part due to the internet. Once a “word of mouth industry” the business of Prostitution in Massachusetts now “advertised”. It is a booming business. Media outlets such as backpage.com and others permit people to offer their services. Customer responses are voluminous. Many of the women offering sex for a fee fly into Boston for a weekend, oftentimes during a convention or large event. They stay in top notch hotels where they perform the solicited acts. They often service several customers per day and leave Massachusetts with large profits. Massage parlors are notorious for providing the same services. The difference is that the illicit activity is masked by the appearance of a lawful business.

Just recently a large Prostitution sting in Boston resulted in scores of arrests. The operation involved undercover officers posing as prostitutes, soliciting and/or receiving solicitations and agreeing to a price and meeting place. When the customers arrived they were identified and arrested. All were charged with Sexual Conduct for a Fee. Our office represented several of these individuals. None of them were convicted and none of them have a criminal record. More importantly, there are no CORI entries that can be accessed by the public or perspective employers for these people. Hiring an experienced criminal lawyer is the best decision these defendants made.

Most of the time these cases are resolved prior to trial. Provided the accused has an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer a typical disposition involves pretrial probation for six months to a year. This usually means no criminal record at least as to these charges. Recently these cases have gotten lots of attention and the “customers” have found themselves identified in local newspapers or on police logs. Law enforcement does this deliberately to deter others from engaging in this type of conduct. This is not only embarrassing it often has a negative effect on job searches, promotions or social activities. Sometimes media outlets agree to removing the name of the accused with the urging of the defendant’s Criminal Lawyer.

Continue Reading

| by

At about 1:15 in the morning a Massachusetts police officer conducted a stop in Norwell. The basis for the stop was that the car had a revoked registration. The passenger had a hollowed out pen under his feet that the officer observed when he approached the car. The pen was covered in tin foil and had a burnt tip. Based on this observation the officer conducted a search of the passenger. In his possession was found over one hundred Oxycodone pills over two thousand dollars cash. Underneath his seat was a pellet gun. The defendant, Christopher Andrade was arrested. He has been charged with some Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Crimes, Trafficking a Class B Substance, Possession of Class B and Possession With the Intent to Distribute Class B. Right now the case is being prosecuted in the Hingham District Court but it will probably be indicted and handled in the Plymouth County Superior Court in Brockton.

Read Article:

Hingham Drug Trafficking Defense Lawyer

Plymouth County Oxycodone Trafficking Attorney

It is interesting that this article is silent as to the driver and whether or not any charges will be filed against that person. Usually when the police in Massachusetts make an arrest for a drug offense, particularly one that has occurred in a car, all occupants get charged with something. The person in possession of the drugs will be charged with the most serious crime that the prosecution believes it can prove against that person. In this case, Andrade has been charged with Trafficking Class B given the amount of Oxycodone in his possession. Typically the driver however would be charged with Conspiracy simply as a result of his presence at the crime scene and his association with the primary defendant. As mentioned in several previous blog posts, merely being present at the scene of a crime does not give rise to criminal culpability. However, that does not always stop the prosecution from going after that person. An experienced criminal lawyer might succeed in getting the case against him or her dismissed on what is called a “McCarthy Motion”. These motions attack the indictment process by claiming that the grand jury was not presented with evidence legally sufficient to sustain the indictment. These motions are fact specific. Our office has won many drug cases through this process. It is something that every Diligent Massachusetts Defense Criminal Lawyer will look into when defending superior court cases.

Here is what appears somewhat troubling about the charges in this case. Andrade appears to be a user. The Drug Possession Paraphernalia was under his feet indicative of him having used drugs shortly before the car was stopped. The driver was likely either using drugs with him or selling him the drugs he was using. It is not uncommon for people to try to conceal drugs when the police are approaching. This is done by putting drugs in glove compartments, consoles, under seats, swallowing the drugs, tossing the drugs or placing them in pockets or other articles of clothing. These actions do not demonstrate an intent to distribute which is a critical element of the crime of Drug Trafficking in Massachusetts. It would not surprise me to learn that these drugs belonged to the driver and that Andrade put them in his clothing while trying to hide them prior to being approached by the police officer.

Continue Reading

| by

ID-Theft5.jpgBack in early February Hingham, Massachusetts Police responded to a call for a dispute between a landlord and her tenant. Officers were advised that the woman had several aliases and was using multiple identities. An ensuing investigation showed that the woman, Wanpen Florentine had multiple birth dates, a couple of Massachusetts drivers’ licenses and perhaps more than seven names. Florentine was registered to vote under two difference names. Last week Florentine was arrested and charged with various Fraud and Identity Theft crimes, five of which are felonies. This past Monday a Search Warrant was obtained and Florentin’s home in Hingham was searched. The defendant is sixty two years old. She is being held on one hundred twenty five thousand dollars bail.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Identity Fraud Crimes Defense Lawyer

The Massachusetts Identity Theft statute is G.L. c. 266 §37E which states that anyone who poses as someone else without that person’s permission and uses that identifying information to obtain goods, money or other items of value, or uses that identifying information to harass someone else is guilty of a misdemeanor. The punishment for a conviction for this offense is no more than two and one half years in the house and the possibility of a fine of up to five thousand dollars. Interestingly enough, it does not appear that the defendant in this case has been charged with this offense. Instead, she has been charged with Fraud related Motor Vehicle Crimes that are felonies, meaning that there is a possibility that the defendant will be indicted and could face a state prison sentence. Obviously the district attorney believes that her actions were serious enough to warrant prosecuting pursuant to other statutes.

Identity Theft is becoming rampant in this country. It is estimated that over nine million people are the victims of some sort of identity theft crime every year. The danger to fraud victims is real and may not be realized for years. Victims of this type of criminal activity may be denied job opportunities, loans and are sometimes arrested for allegations that they committed crimes that they in fact never committed. We have represented many people who have been charged with Crimes in Massachusetts who never actually committed these crimes. The people who stole their identity were the actual perpetrators of the crime. You can imagine the surprise and shock to the accused in these cases when they are arrested for drug offense, theft crimes or crimes of violence that they never even heard about.

Continue Reading

| by

Roberto Saldana of Boston and Rose Marquez-Cartegena of Lawrence, Massachusetts were arrested late last week by members of the Essex County Drug Task Force. The Lawrence Eagle Tribune reports that Saldana was caught Distributing Heroin on six occasions to an undercover officer starting in January of 2012 and ending with his arrest on February 28, 2012. Each time Saldana was within one thousand feet of Central Catholic High School. During Saldana’s arrest the police found a set of keys to a local apartment in Saldana’s possession. Officers then took Saldana back to the home and has him open the apartment door. There officers found Marquez-Cartegena who was also arrested. A Search Warrant was obtained following her arrest. In the apartment authorities located and seized over seventeen thousand dollars cash, Drug Paraphernalia including cutting agents, packaging materials and a scale. Marquez-Cartegena has been charged with Possession With the Intent to Distribute Class A Heroin in a School Zone. The cases are pending in the Lawrence District Court. It is probable that the district attorney will not indict these cases.

Read Article:

Lawrence Massachusetts Heroin Distribution Lawyer

Massachusetts Drug Violation in a School Zone Defense Attorney

The Massachusetts School Zone Drug Law was established in 1989 under G.L. c. 94C §32J. The law makes it a felony for anyone to Distribute, Possess With the Intent to Distribute or Traffic a controlled substance within one thousand feet of a school zone or within one hundred feet of a public playground or park. There is a minimum mandatory two year sentence for a conviction of this crime. Schools for the purpose of this law includes both public and private schools, pre-schools, secondary schools and vocational schools. It makes no difference if the school is in session or not, day night or vacation. In 2010 the Massachusetts legislature amended the law so that in many instances someone convicted can be paroled after serving one year.

As most Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyers will tell you School Zone Cases are often “broken down” by the district attorney’s office. This means that for many accused, particularly first time drug offenders with no criminal record, the district attorney’s office will agree to dismiss the School Zone Charge in exchange for a plea to a either a Possession With Intent charge or a simple Possession charge. Oftentimes an experienced Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer will be able to negotiate a continuance without a finding to the remaining charges thereby keeping the accused’s criminal record clean.

Here, while Saldana might have some problems it seems like Marquez-Cartegena’s case might have some good defenses. The police had no right to force Saldana to open the apartment door prior to obtaining a search warrant. If anything learned as a result of that unlawful entry gave a basis for the issuance of the search warrant the warrant might be declared invalid and the search struck down as unconstitutional. Also, Marquez-Cartegena’s mere presence at the apartment does not by itself provide sufficient evidence by which a jury might find her with the intent to distribute drugs. Massachusetts case law has been clear on this point. Presence at the scene of a crime with nothing more is insufficient to sustain a conviction for a crime.

Continue Reading

| by

ShotSpotter.jpgThe first degree murder trial of Dwayne Moore and Edward Washington is in progress in a Boston, Massachusetts Superior Court courtroom. Civilian witnesses have recently testified and the jurors have been told that fourteen shots were fired during the killing of two Boston men, a woman and her two year old child. All fourteen shots were allegedly fired in a ninety four second period. Twelve initially, one more a minute and ten second later and the final shot was fired twenty four seconds later. An expert witness from SST Inc. a, California company that manufactures the ShotSpotter System testified today about the times when the shots were fired and the time lapse between shots. This is a unique way for prosecutors to corroborate the testimony of civilian witnesses. This type of evidence is becoming more prevalent nationwide. It is something that criminal defense attorneys will have to prepare for more frequently as it is expected to be a staple in proceedings involving gunshots.

Read Article:

Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer, Firearms Cases, Gunshots, Shooting Cases

There are several gunshot sensor systems on the market right now. The one used in this case is ShotSpotter. This system relies on acoustic sensors that can pick up the gunshot sounds and triangulate them with GPS devices. A series of sensors are placed in designated spots within each square mile of the section of the city it is covering. The sensors coordinate with the GPS system and identify the location of the shooting.

Here is a simplified explanation of how the system works. Once a shot is fired one of the sensors picks it up. The sensors have a range of two miles meaning that the shot was fired within two miles of the sensor that picks up the sound. A second later a second sensor picks up the sounds of the gunshot waves. Subsequently a third sensor will pick up the sounds. The system uses the locations of the sensors with the time it takes for the sound waves to reach each one and comes up with a configuration that shows the gunshot location in terms of distance from the sensors. The GPS device converts this point with latitude and longitude coordinates that ultimately translates this information to addresses and intersections. The systems calls 911 and identifies the location of the shooting. ShotSpotter’s accuracy is estimated at about eighty two feet.

From my perspective this type of evidence benefits the accused as much as the prosecution. Oftentimes I confront witnesses at trial who lie about the location and positioning of my clients and the co-defendants at or near crime scenes. This will factor into the decision of whether or not my client will testify. Sometimes they feel that they have to in order to refute the lies of the witness. The problem with this is that at times denials seem self-serving to jurors. Evidence produced by a system like ShotSpotter can be used to impeach that witnesses’ testimony and save the defendant from having to testify. Or, this evidence might simply support the testimony of the accused while showing that the witness was not telling the truth.

Continue Reading

| by

Kenneth Tozier of Methuen, Massachusetts was charged with Kidnapping a thirty four year old Lawrence woman. The woman made a call to police on Sunday around 5:30. It is alleged that the man and woman who have a child together were arguing about their relationship. The victim’s call alerted the police to the make of the car Tozier was driving as well as its location. The woman told the police that the couple had travelled from Lawrence to Boston and that Tozier would not let her out of the car. Tozier was apprehended in South Boston where he was arraigned yesterday morning. Bail was set at seven hundred fifty dollars. The district attorney recommended a bail of one hundred thousand dollars. The case will likely be prosecuted in the South Boston District Court.

Read Article:

Methuen Massachusetts Domestic Violence Defense Lawyer

Lawrence Massachusetts Kidnapping Lawyer

It is likely that the defendant was charged under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 265 Section 26. That statute makes it a crime for anyone to forcibly seize a person or confine someone against the person’s will. The crime is a felony and is punishable by up to ten years on state prison. If a Firearm is used during the commission of this crime there is a ten year minimum mandatory sentence that the defendant must serve.

Despite the purported seriousness of the allegations, the factual underpinnings of this case suggest that the prosecution will take place in the district court where there is a maximum house of correction sentence of two years. Here is why. The couple have a child together. According to the police the defendant admitted that for a moment he just “lost it”. This is not the type of conduct that warrants a state prison sentence or a prosecution in the superior court. I would imagine that once the dust has settled the woman will not want to see Tozier incarcerated. If he does not have a criminal record the possibility of a continuance without a finding exists. Sometimes an anger management class will accompany the cwof. If the woman remains fearful of the defendant perhaps a Restraining Order will issue or the Court will require the defendant to stay away from the victim. It does appear however that this case can be resolved favorably to the defendant. Clearly the judge realized this when he set a bail ninety nine thousand two hundred fifty dollars below that the district attorney was requesting. This is a perfect example that not all crimes are as serious as initially reported. This makes it necessary that anyone charged with a crime immediately contact an experienced criminal defense lawyer. Here, Tozier’s lawyer did a great job for him, getting a reasonable bail set at his arraignment.

Continue Reading