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

| by

Police in Braintree, Massachusetts recently investigated reports from a minor child that Michael Cimmino of Braintree had engaged in inappropriate touching. The arrests took place on Saturday afternoon and Cimmino was arraigned in Quincy on Monday. Bail was set at fifty thousand dollars cash. It is further alleged that the incident occurred at Cimmino’s home. The victim is under the age of fourteen. The article in the Quincy Patriot Ledger provided very little detail about the incident, instead focusing on the charges themselves and the conditions of release that restrict Cimmino should he make bail. Cimmino has been charged with Assault With Intent to Commit Rape on a Person Under the Age of 14, Indecent Assault and Battery and Kidnapping. It is unclear as to whether or not the Norfolk County District Attorney will indict these cases or prosecute the charges in the district court.

Read Article:

http://www.patriotledger.com/news/cops_and_courts/x1458589871/Braintree-volunteer-accused-of-child-sex-abuse-suspended

Braintree, Massachusetts Assault With Intent to Rape Defense Lawyer

There is a fundamental legal principle that I have yet to blog on and deserves some attention today, the being the Presumption of Innocence. Every day we read articles like this one, void of any detail yet sensational enough to ruin an innocent person’s life. I am not assigning fault to anyone for this. It is the duty of the prosecution to protect the public and to prosecute people they believe might have committed crimes. It is the duty of the press to report the facts of the cases, a task that is usually done thoroughly in criminal cases. However, it is important to understand that all people accused of committing crimes in this country enjoy a presumption of innocence. Judges must ask prospective jurors if they will adhere to this principle of law. If they cannot then they are not to serve on the jury. The jury is reminded of this principle prior to retiring to their deliberations. Here, Cimmino has been charged with one of the most serious offenses we have. When reading this article people are bound to make judgments even in the absence of facts to support those thoughts. From the perspective of a Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer it is important to keep some thoughts in mind. Who was home at the time this supposedly happened. What did these people hear or see. What exactly did the child report and is it possible that under these circumstances Cimmino could have done this.

Continue Reading

| by

While on patrol this past weekend Lawrence, Massachusetts police officers observed two cars apparently involved in a collision. When they stopped to investigate the officers came in contact with Jonathan Amador and Luis Aguayo, aka Julio Cesar Vincente Peguero. The police asked the drivers of both vehicles for their licenses. One of the drivers was Amador. Amador started speaking with the driver of the other car. Apparently the two knew each other. Meanwhile the officers observed plastic bags containing Crack Cocaine and Heroin in the vehicle’s front passenger cupholder. Bother Amador and Aguayo were arrested and charged with Possession With the Intent to Distribute Heroin, Class A, Possession of Heroin and Possession of Cocaine, Class B. The case is pending in the Lawrence District Court where it will likely be prosecuted.

Read Article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x413853691/Pair-nabbed-with-drugs-in-minivan-cupholder#

Two things come to mind immediately when reading this article. The first is the credibility of the investigation. The report would have you believe that after a minor accident the defendants left an obvious quantity of drugs in the vehicle in plain view. Most people realize that police will respond to accident scenes. In cities like Lawrence their response time will be quicker than in suburbs or rural areas. Amador and Aguayo must have known that the police would arrive shortly and would have concealed the drugs had they feared detection. I would be interested to hear what the occupants of the other vehicle observed relative to the search of the car. Their statements might give cause to file a Motion to Suppress the evidence seized. The second issue that is see is attribution. Whose drugs were these anyway. The report has them in the passenger side of the vehicle thereby suggesting that they did not belong to Amador. However, Aguayo could argue that he was unaware of the presence of the substances in the car in that it belonged to someone else.

Continue Reading

| by

An unidentified eighteen year old went to Quincy, Massachusetts last Thursday to buy some Marijuana. There he met with Tommy Dao of Braintree, Massachusetts and Nicholas Morganelli of Quincy. Instead of getting his Drugs however the teenager was robbed. Dao has been charged with Unarmed Robbery. Morganelli has been charged with Possession With Intent to Distribute Marijuana. According to reports in the Patriot Ledger Morganelli was found in possession of thirty eight small bags of marijuana.

Read Article:

http://www.patriotledger.com/news/cops_and_courts/x338105899/Man-robbed-trying-to-make-pot-buy-in-Quincy

robbery 2.jpg

Quincy Drug Defense Lawyer
Quincy Robbery Defense Attorney

Most people do not understand that someone who is in the process of committing a crime can also be the victim of a crime. As an example of this, our office reports countless people who break into drug dens or stash houses to steal drugs and/or money. Many times in the course of these events the occupants of the home become injured or scared. The assailants if caught are charged with either Breaking and Entering or Home Invasion or both. Many of these people thought that their actions would go unprosecuted simply because their victims were involved in criminal activities. Here, Dao can be charged with Robbery if he tried forcibly took from the victim property with the intent to deprive that person of that property. However, something does not appear right with this report. If Morganelli intended to distribute the drugs why not just sell them to the victim. The prosecution charged him with Possession With the Intent to Distribute the Marijuana found in his possession. If he in fact did intend to sell the drugs why not do so here? If the point was to rob the victim there was no need for him to have the drugs with him in the first place.

Continue Reading

| by

Yesterday a Lawrence, Massachusetts police detective went to Miguel Francisco Acosta’s home on Myrtle Street to serve him with a Restraining Order. On the way there the detective was notified that Acosta had an outstanding warrant. When the officer and his backups arrived they were permitted entry by a female. Acosta was present. He was arrested. The police gave him the opportunity to get some pants on. They followed Acosta into the adjoining room and found a significant amount of Marijuana, Heroin, Drug Trafficking Paraphernalia and a Handgun. Acosta has been charged with Trafficking a Class A Substance, Possession With Intent to Distribute Marijuana, a School Zone Violation, Intimidation of a Witness, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm and Assault With a Dangerous Weapon. The case is currently pending in the Lawrence District Court however it is probable that the prosecution will end up in the Essex County Superior Court in Salem.

Read Article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1758586621/Lawrence-man-arrested-on-drug-assault-charges#

scales.jpg

In preparing to defend this case Experienced Massachusetts Drug Defense Attorneys would investigate several facts. Did the woman who allowed the police to enter the home have the authority to do so? Was there a valid outstanding warrant to arrest Acosta? Did Acosta really invite the officer into the bedroom when he was putting on his pants? Who owned or rented the home? Who else stayed in the bedroom where the drugs were located? Did that person or people have a criminal record for drug offenses. Where in particular were the drugs located in the room? In a hidden place or in plain view? What about the Firearm? Where was that located? The answers to these questions might provide the basis for a viable defense to these charges. A proper defense might result in Acosta not having to serve the mandatory jail time associated with these crimes.

Continue Reading

| by

Around 7:00 a.m. Christmas morning Salem, Massachusetts police received a 911 call from a woman crying and asking for help. The police responded to her home and found Franklin Sousa shirtless and pulling down the shades. The police went to the door where they were greeted by a woman covered with blood. Sousa ran out the back door. He was chased by a police officer. Sousa was reportedly holding something in his hand. When the officers subdued him he was injured. The complaining witness stated that she and Sousa had dated and were living together. On Christmas Eve Sousa became hostile. The woman claims that she barricaded her apartment door to keep Sousa out and went to sleep. She woke up with Sousa standing over her. He then struck her. Sousa has been charged with Domestic Assault and Battery, Malicious Destruction to Property, Resisting Arrest, Witness Intimidation, Assault and Battery on a Police Officer, Disorderly Person and Resisting Arrest. The case is pending in the Salem District Court.

Read Article:

http://www.salemnews.com/local/x480667508/Salem-man-held-in-attacks-on-his-girlfriend-police#

Salem Massachusetts Domestic Violence Defense Lawyer

As a Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney here is what I see as concerning about these allegations. The complaining witness barricades herself in her room in an attempt to keep a violent Sousa out. She then goes to sleep without calling the police. She wakes up in the morning with him standing over her. Then he squeezes her face causing her to bleed. You have to wonder why she did not call the police immediately. You also have to wonder what Sousa was doing and where he was from the time of the barricade on Christmas Eve until 7:00 in the morning, as the article says with his shirt off. Facts like this that do not make sense often serve as a starting point for defenses to criminal accusations.

Continue Reading

| by

Jeremy Gardner and Walter Smith have both been indicted by a Middlesex County Grand Jury for charges relating to the death of Gregory Vilidnitsky, a Framingham man. Gardner is from Maine. Smith is from Vermont. According to the Metrowest Daily News both defendants, carpenters, were working in Wayland and had been out drinking near their hotel. It is reported that Gardner was driving a vehicle that struck the victim who was paving at the time. The car then hit an oil truck. Gardner fled and Smith tried to drive the damaged vehicle away. Gardner has been charged with Motor Vehicle Homicide, OUI Second Offense and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. Smith has been charged with OUI Fourth Offense.

Read Article:

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/news/police_and_fire/x1732522163/Men-indicted-in-crash-that-killed-Framingham-highway-engineer

Middlesex County Massachusetts Motor Vehicle Homicide Defense Lawyer

The severity of these charges is best evidenced by the fact that both defendants have been indicted for crimes that could be prosecuted in the district court. The most serious charge that Gardner is facing is the Motor Vehicle Homicide charge which is a felony in Massachusetts and carries with it a possible fifteen year state prison sentence. As a Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney I would like to know what evidence shows that Gardner was impaired at the time of operation. There is no indication that he took a breathalyzer test nor is there any indication that he took and failed any field sobriety tests. Also why did each defendant accuse the other of operating the car. Eyewitnesses should be able to identify the driver. If they cannot then perhaps this issue will become a point of contention at trial.

Continue Reading

| by

The Brockton Enterprise reports that Antonio Gomes, a Brockton, Massachusetts resident was arrested after allegedly pulling a knife during a “road rage” incident in Norton. A man reported that Gomes was driving behind him in an erratic manner. Gomes then passed the man and brandished a knife. The incident happened in Norton. Gomes reportedly got out of his car, argued with the other driver and waived a knife at him. He then drove away. The victim called the police who stopped and arrested Gomes. The defendant has been charged with three counts of Assault by Means of a Dangerous Weapon.

Read Article:

http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/cops_and_courts/x934173956/Brockton-man-allegedly-pulls-knife-in-Norton-traffic-dispute

roadrage.jpg

The Wikipedia defines road rage as a form of aggressive or angry behavior by a driver of a car or other vehicle. The acts that form the deed include insults, rude gestures, driving in an unsafe or threatening manner or some sort of threatening conduct while operating a motor vehicle. Sometimes road rage incidents develop into violent criminal acts, even murder. Massachusetts does not have a road rage statute. Rather, this state charges the offender with the underlying crime committed during the road rage event. Here, there were three occupants of the victim’s car, all of whom the prosecution claims were victims of Gomes use of the knife. The underlying crime here is Assault by Means of a Dangerous Weapon, a felony in Massachusetts. I would imagine that if Gomes does not have a criminal record this case might be continued without a finding conditioned upon some sort of anger management counseling.

Continue Reading

| by

According to the Lowell Sun two men were arrested in Burlington, Massachusetts last week. Both are being charged with Trafficking Heroin Over 28 Grams, Conspiracy to Violate the Controlled Substances Law and a School Zone Violation. The defendants, Wilkims Soto-Suazo and Jesus Pantonja are from Norwood, Massachusetts and Hyde Park, Massachusetts respectively. Apparently the Range Rover the defendants were in was under surveillance. Officers pulled it over on the Winn Street ramp by Route 128. A canine unit sniffed out over fifty six grams of heroin. The article is silent as to where in the vehicle the drugs were found and what evidence links each defendant to the substances.

Read Article:

http://www.lowellsun.com/local/ci_16910612

As I have mentioned many times in the past the validity of the stop is an issue that an Experienced Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney will investigate. An unlawful stop often results in the suppression of the evidence that has been seized as a result of the stop. There had to be a reason that the vehicle was pulled over on the ramp rather than at another location. There also had to be a reason that the police called for a canine unit. If the officers had probable cause to arrest at the time of the stop there would be no need to take this measure. An inventory search of the vehicle could have been conducted at the station. Thus, the question of why these men were pulled over is critical. It would also be necessary to know the length of time these people were detained before the canine unit arrived. These factors affect the constitutional analysis of this case. The next issue to tackle is the location of the drugs in the vehicle as well as ownership of the car. If the car was borrowed and the drugs were in a “hide” the district attorney will have to prove knowledge of the existence of the drugs in the vehicle. At times proof of this sort can be difficult particularly where it was necessary to get a dog to locate the substance.

Continue Reading

| by

Joel Matias of Lawrence, Massachusetts received good news yesterday when he entered a Lawrence District Court courtroom and had an Assault With a Dangerous Weapon case against him dismissed. That case involved a shooting that occurred this past summer after two groups got into a fight and someone fired a handgun. After getting the case dismissed Matias went down the hallway to get an electronic monitoring device removed. While doing so he allegedly passed two girls and called them snitches. The device was removed and Matias was arrested and charged with Witness Intimidation.

Read Article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1168755064/Assault-charge-dismissed-teen-arrested-in-courthouse

witness intimidation.jpg

Massachusetts Witness Intimidation Defense Lawyer

The Witness Intimidation statute in Massachusetts is quite broad. The law, G.L. 268 Section 13B, makes it a crime for anyone to either directly or indirectly threaten, injure, or attempt to do harm to anyone who is a witness to or someone interested in a criminal matter at any stage. The statute also prohibits giving gifts to or in any intimidating such people. A conviction for this crime carries a potential ten year state prison sentence. The district court had jurisdiction of these charges as well and there is a maximum two and one half year sentence for anyone convicted in that court for intimidating a witness. As a Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer I would like to know who witnessed Matias make the threats. It makes no sense that someone who just got his case dismissed would be making threats as such in the courthouse. Usually witnesses are intimidated in an effort to prevent them from testifying against someone. This occurs before the resolution of a case, not once the case has terminated. This situation sounds like someone took exception to the dismissal and wanted to keep Matias on his heels.

Continue Reading

| by

Last week Boston Police responded to a call for a Breaking and Entering on Seaver Street. At around 1:00 a.m., shortly after receiving the call, officers spotted a subject fitting the description of the suspect walking nearby with two other individuals. As police approached they noticed the defendant, Antoine Lewis of Randolph, Massachusetts appearing to be carrying a heavy object in his jacket pocket. The police and Lewis engaged in a struggle. The officers seized a loaded nine millimeter handgun. Bail was set at fifty thousand dollars cash. Lewis already served more than two years for a prior gun possession charge. Lewis will likely be charged with Illegal Gun Possession in the Suffolk County Superior Court.

Massachusetts Gun Possession Defense Attorney

Read Article:

Boston Firearm Defense Lawyer

lewis.jpg

Illegal Gun Possession in Massachusetts is made a crime under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 269 Section 10. For people like Lewis who are charged with a second offense a conviction carries a mandatory five year state prison sentence and a maximum seven year sentence. Being properly licensed with a carrying permit and a firearm identification card serves as an affirmative defense to these charges. For Lewis however it appears that these defenses are not viable. Attacking the legality of the stop, Search and Seizure is always a tact to take and might be the only possible avenue for relief in this case. Regardless, Lewis’ Massachusetts Criminal Defense Lawyer has his work cut out for him.

Continue Reading