Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog

As we head into another weekend…edging ever closer to the holiday season…a reminder about one of the more common criminal justice pitfalls which people tend to experience. Namely, drunk driving.

Many cases around the subject of Operating Under the Influence have hit the press this past week. Today’s daily blog looks at three of them, all three differing in their stage of the prosecution.

First, let’s look to Yarmouth, Massachusetts, the scene of an interesting arrest scene, particularly if you are a dog lover, Tuesday. Axel, the police department K-9 dog, was called upon to help locate an alleged drunk driver at the Foxwoods Condominiums in West Yarmouth .

Bryan C., 41, of Barnstable, (hereinafter, “Defendant 1”) is said to have crashed his 2001 Monte Carlo deep into the woods off Camp Street around 10 p.m. Tuesday. Police say he then fled the scene.

Strikes one and two.

When officers arrived they found the severely damaged car, but no driver. Police were told by a witness that the lone male driver had crawled out of the vehicle, grabbed an item and ran off.

Police brought in K-9 patrol officer Peter McClelland and his partner Axel to track the suspect. They initially found an opened and cold 12 pack of beer - with four remaining cans - on the side of the road about 200 yards from the crash scene. The track continued and led to the front door of a unit at the condominium complex.

Once found, Defendant 1 told officers he was "having a bad night" and admitted to driving the vehicle.

Strike three. Out.

Continue reading "Drunk Driving In Massachusetts – Three Stages Of The Criminal Justice Experience" »

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Law , Misdemeanors , Murder , OUI/Drunk Driving , Probation Violations , Traffic Violations , Vehicular Crimes

Bookmark:

Today is Veteran’s Day. It is a day for reflection and a day to honor the men and women who have served this country in the trenches of various lands throughout the years.

Today’s daily blog looks at a matter occurring inside more local trenches. Criminal Justice trenches. The courtroom. A courtroom on Salem, Massachusetts, to be exact. While it certainly does not involve the valor we celebrate today nationally, it does contain some violence and a couple of lessons for us.

Martin S., 53, of Lynn (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) recently lost his battle for his own personal liberty in the Salem courtroom. He was sentenced to serve two years at the Massachusetts Correctional Institute at Cedar Junction as he was found to have violated probation. Two witnesses testified at the hearing that he grabbed a woman by the throat and fought another man during a September 21, 2008 altercation at an apartment on Lynde Street in Salem.

The Defendant’s attorney said he had gone to the apartment to get his girlfriend out of there because she was drinking alcohol, a violation of her probation for a drunken-driving conviction.

Although the assault charge is still pending in court, the Superior Court Judge observed that the arrest itself is a probation violation. "He's gotten away with quite a bit in the last couple of years," the judge said yesterday before announcing the sentence at the conclusion of a probation hearing.

Continue reading "Massachusetts Probation For Fraud Is Violated By Assault Charges" »

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Assault , Assault and Battery , Criminal Law , Drug Offenses , Felonies and Violent Crimes , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations , White Collar Crimes

Bookmark:

Massachusetts just voted to change the way we handle the prosecution of possessing a small amount of marihuana. Meanwhile, alcohol still seems to be getting its share of publicity as well.

Two recent stories bring the subject of alcohol home.

No, literally….home.

For example, at approximately 4:30 a.m. this past Saturday morning, Park Street in Stoughton was the scene of a lot of excitement; a car crashed into one of its houses, causing a fire that is now said to have made the house structurally unsafe.

Donald M., 22 (hereinafter, “Defendant 1”) is said to have driven into the uninhabited home, police said, and charged with operating under the influence of liquor, operating a motor vehicle negligently so as to endanger and marked lanes violation.

Fortunately, the home had already been uninhabited.

“Why?”, you ask.

“Because a similar thing happened last year”, I answer. That’s right, the house had already sustained serious damage, including a gaping hole to its foundation, caused by a similar accident last year. Defendant 1’s accident simply added another gaping hole. And caused a fire. And pushed the safety of the structure over the edge of soundness.

Continue reading "South And North Of Boston Tales Of Drunk Driving And Providing Alcohol To Minors Come Home To Roost" »

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Law , Drug Offenses , Misdemeanors , OUI/Drunk Driving , Probation Violations , Traffic Violations

Bookmark:

In today’s daily blog we continue our Halloween Theme Week with a salute to the festive spirit…including those who do not even wait for the holiday they are celebrating to arrive.

‘Tis the season for Halloween celebrations! Parties are almost mandatory for some good old fashion evil-tinged fun. What better place than Lynn for a backdrop of such a party. After all, you have heard the old saying, “Lynn, Lynn, the city of sin…!”

And so it was that various Halloween revelers partied hearty this past Friday night and into Saturday morning. By 1:00 a.m., the crowd had apparently thinned out to an intimate group of between 60 and 70 people.

In these troubled times, one just cannot have too much fun…so they wanted the party to continue. They just did not want to leave. Somebody somewhere disagreed, however, and the police were called to disperse the crowd.

Did I mention that the crowd did not wish to be dispersed?

And so it was that a disagreement of sorts took place between the police and the dispersement-challenged in West Lynn, Massachusetts.

Well, kind of a physical disagreement.

Alright, it was a fight.

Continue reading "North Of Boston, Halloween Celebration Leads To Charges Of Disorderly Conduct, Resisting Arrest And Assault On A Police Officer" »

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Assault , Assault and Battery , Criminal Law , Felonies and Violent Crimes , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations

Bookmark:

Here is a cautionary tale out of Lynn, Massachusetts, that could have ended much differently.

On Monday night, shortly after 10:00pm, Jackeline H., 26, of Haverhill, (hereinafter, the “Defendant”), earned the Commonwealth’s Bracelets of Shame after an alleged robbery.

According to the police, a certain unnamed gentleman (hereinafter, “Mr. Unnamed”) had just dropped off his girlfriend at her home and was now sitting in his car on Lewis Street, perhaps lost in thoughts of a lovely romantic evening, with a pile of cash just lying in the center console. $240 in cash to be exact.

Suddenly, according to the police, the Defendant suddenly appeared out of nowhere and jumped into the “Car o’ Cash”. She asked the driver if he wanted to buy a pair of sunglasses.

He answered “No”

At that point, the Defendant took the more direct approach and allegedly grabbed the money and jumped out of the car.

Mr. Unnamed, then, followed her down the street demanding his money back. This continued until the Defendant allegedly said she had a screw driver and, "Don't come any closer or I'll stab you," according to a police report.

Continue reading "North Of Boston, A Robbery Victim Gets Lucky" »

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Assault , Assault and Battery , Criminal Law , Domestic Violence , Felonies and Violent Crimes , Illegal Weapons Possession , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations , Rape , Restraining Orders , Robbery , Sexual Assault , Sexual Crimes , Theft Crimes

Bookmark:

David K., 38, of Hamilton, Massachusetts (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) is getting points for consistency – negative points. He has just been arrested for his third alleged occasion of driving under the influence. In fact, he also faces bonus points for violating probation because of the arrest. Currently, he is awaiting his final score as a guest of the Commonwealth.

The Defendant came to the attention of police when he was driving just after 2:00 a.m. on Bridge Street in Beverly. Unfortunately, the headlights on his pickup truck were not on. He was pulled over and, during questioning, the officer says he smelled alcohol and noticed that the driver seemed uncoordinated as he fumbled for the registration. When asked if he had been drinking, the Defendant showed the officer a prescription bottle of Trazadone, a painkiller he said he was taking because of surgery to his Achilles tendon two years ago. According to the police report, he also told the officer that he had taken two pills — twice the suggested dosage.

Digesting all of this, the officer checked the Defendant’s information and learned that the Defendant was not even supposed to be behind the wheel in the first place. In addition to a one-year license suspension because of two similar cases last year, his license had been revoked in December for four years by the Registry of Motor Vehicles, which deemed him a habitual offender for some reason.

You see, last year, the Defendant was arrested twice in less than a month for impaired driving. On August 4, 2007, he was charged with drunken driving after sideswiping another driver on Route 128 in Danvers, forcing the other driver off the road, according to a police report. He registered a .30 on a Breathalyzer test that time and denied that an accident occurred, despite a mirror hanging off the other driver’s car and other damage.

A few weeks later, on August 30, 2007, he was driving near the intersection of Bridge and River streets when he turned a corner and crashed into the side of a car that was stopped for a stop sign, injuring one of the two young children in the back seat, according to a police report. When the police came, they saw that the Defendant, who was not supposed to be driving because of the earlier arrest, was “lethargic” and slow to respond. He explained that he had taken both Ativan and Torpol that morning. Police believe he had also taken twice the recommended dose, according to the report.

In October, 2007, Judge Robert Brennan ordered the Defendant to serve 90 days of a 2 1/2 year jail term for both cases, with the balance suspended for two years. During those two years, of course, he would be on probation.

You guessed it…that means that the new arrest violates his probation and the Defendant could now be facing another 27 months in Middleton Jail if he is found to have violated his probation. This would be on top of any additional punishment for the new charges.

The Defendant makes his next court appearance on Oct. 16th; this time the Commonwealth will be providing his transportation.

Sam’s take:

I am sure you already know that you are not supposed to drive while intoxicated. I’ll bet you even know that it is illegal to drive when your license is suspended or revoked. However, here is something that you may not know…at least today’s Defendant did not seem to know…you are not supposed to drive if you are impaired by medication, even if it is legally prescribed.

The Bridge Street Bomber seemed to think that by showing the police that he was simply under the influence of medication would somehow solve the problem of his fumbling with his registration and odor of alcohol. The “No, I’m not drunk…just under the influence of this other little beauty” approach will not, and did not, help the situation. Neither does explaining how you took a double dosage…especially when you seem to have a history of doing that.

Years ago, people did not take drunk driving very seriously. It is widely understood that this has changed in a big way. However, there are still people who think that driving without a valid license is not that big a deal. It is. Aside from being a crime in itself, driving when your license is not valid sends a message to the court that its rulings do not particularly matter to you. Judges tend to frown upon that.

And now a word about being on probation. “On probation” is not a legal term for “Care Free”. Failing to follow the department of probation’s directives means a violation of probation. A violation usually means jail. When the violation is a new arrest, the result is usually jail before the new case is even resolved. That’s right…while you are still presumed innocent of the new charges.

While on probation, you are in a state of diminished rights. You are free so long as you comply with your probation officer. You also have fewer of the safeguards afforded you when facing a regular criminal charge. While there is a hearing, there is no full-blown trial. The issue to be decided is not whether you are guilty of the new offense. It is whether you violated probation.

Again, getting re-arrested is a violation of probation.

If you have any question about your rights while on probation or what does and does not constitute operating under the influence, you should contact an experienced criminal defense attorney. Do not guess. Do not assume. And, if your ability to drive is compromised, do not drive.

Have a good and law-abiding weekend!

The full article of this story can be found at :
http://www.salemnews.com/punews/local_story_283001115.html

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Law , Misdemeanors , OUI/Drunk Driving , Probation Violations , Traffic Violations , Vehicular Crimes

Bookmark:

William Shakespeare once told us that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. His point was “What’s in a name?” A gentleman from Chicopee, Massachusetts, apparently agrees with him. In Chicopee, he is known as Felix Maldonado. In Waterbury, Connecticut, however, he was known as Alfredo “Eddie” Gonzalez. But to us, as well as the criminal justice system, he is now known as the Defendant.

The Defendant, 43, is currently being held without bail in Connecticut, courtesy of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where his various identities were finally meshed. He was returned to Connecticut in August to face 18 outstanding arrest warrants dating back to 1995 and 1996.

He had been alluding authorities for years by moving around and using a variety of aliases and birth dates, police said. After all, what good is a new identity without a new birthdate to go along with it?

The Defendant had a real talent in the fine art of escape. At one time, police said, he escaped from the rear of a state police cruiser on Interstate 84 after being stopped for a New Jersey drug charge. In Connecticut, he was known for running a major "chop shop" for stolen automobiles in the 1990s.

The last known Chicopee address for the Defendant was on Plante Circle, although it is not known how long he lived there…how long he may have lived in Chicopee…or where else he may have lived. While he was bouncing around from locale to locale, Connecticut State Police Sgt. Robert Kenney, the former supervisor of the region's auto theft task force, is said to have been diligently investigating the case

"Information obtained as a result of Sgt. Kenney and his team helped us locate the accused. Certainly, he was able to elude capture and certainly, we made all law enforcement agencies know we had active arrest warrants for him and we were looking forward to when he surfaced and he did exactly just that," said Connecticut State Police spokesman Lt. J. Paul Vance.

Vance explained that the Defendant’s elusiveness stemmed, as in other cases, from the use of aliases and other false information. "Certainly, this was great police work and he faces several felony violations which could be punishable by significant incarceration. These are serious felony charges," said Vance.

Some of the charges are larceny, operating a chop shop, abandoning a vehicle and changing a vehicle identification number. Authorities also noted that he was adept at sharing his wealth of “catch me if you can” talents and hiding the identity of various cars.

Chicopee District Court officials said the Defendant has been in the courts for motor vehicle and related offenses, assault in a dwelling while armed with a firearm and witness intimidation this year.

He has served time in the Hampden County Correctional Institution in Ludlow and is on probation in Massachusetts through June. Unfortunately, defaulting and hiding from the Commonwealth is generally a violation of probation. Doing it across state lines can also trigger federal charges.

Stay tuned, I guess, for more states, names and birthdates as word of this catch me kid circulates across the country.

Sam’s take:

They say you can’t escape your own past; that is true in the criminal justice system. Many people believe if they put some effort into it, they can hide from pending criminal charges and the authorities will forget about them. It does not work that way.

If you do not show up for a court date, the court does not take a “Well, if he doesn’t care; I don’t care” approach. The court orders a default warrant. It is a warrant for your arrest because you defaulted…in other words, you did not show up. In civil cases, a default means you have lost your case. That is generally not how it works in the criminal justice system. Except in some cases involving trials, it means that the case is on hold and they are looking for you. When you are found, you will be brought back to face the charges, only now you will probably be awaiting your trial behind bars because you have shown yourself to be a flight risk. Not only that, but most likely whatever bail you or a loved one had posted will have been forfeited because you did not show up.

Over my many years in the trenches, I have heard many excuses for not showing up in court. They vary in complexity:

“I lost the piece of paper”

“I forgot”

“The court told me I did not have to come back”

“My lawyer told me I did not have to come back”

“The court officer told me I did not have to come back”

“I was busy”

“I was on my way, but I was late because I had to drop my daughter off at school. Then I had a panic attack. Afraid I might have a heart attack, I checked into a hospital. When I was released from the hospital, I was going to come to the court, but wanted to get a sandwich first. After eating it, I felt nauseous, so I went home to lay down. I must have had food poisoning because I slept for three days. By the time I woke up…I forgot about the case.”

Ok, I admit that last one is a combination of a few excuses I have heard. And I know that sometimes something unexpected comes up. But, as far as the court is concerned, there is nothing, short of emergency hospitalization, that is more important than your showing up in court. In the case of such hospitalization, you had best show up in court at the first possible moment with some kind of proof as soon as you get out of the hospital.

If you are currently hiding from a default warrant…stop. Each day that goes by worsens your situation. Returning to court on your own is often treated differently, and more favorably, than being brought in against your will. Be sure, however, that being caught is inevitable. It may be because you were stopped for speeding, renewing your driver’s license, applying for a new job, going to pick up a check, or one of a myriad of other typical daily experiences.

The thing to do is to contact an experienced attorney as soon as possible and make arrangements to make your return to court with as little a risk as possible. Each day you wait, the risks rise.

The bottom line? You can run, but you cannot hide…for too long.

the full article of this story can be found at
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/10/fugitive_felix_maldonado_also.html?category=Chicopee+category=Crime

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Assault , Assault and Battery , Criminal Law , Domestic Violence , Drug Offenses , Federal Crimes , Felonies and Violent Crimes , Illegal Weapons Possession , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations , Theft Crimes , Traffic Violations , Vehicular Crimes

Bookmark:

"Uncle Marky”, as he is known to Cape Cod children is in trouble again. He got shot by a Harwich police officer Monday night.

Court and police records describe Marcus M, whose last name has again been changed to “Defendant” as a violent and troubled soul. At the ripe old age of 29, he seems to have already displayed an impressive gift for criminal consistency.

Defendant is a Dennis-Yarmouth High School dropout and the father of one child. He is a Level 2 sex offender after his conviction in 1998 for raping a child, 13, with force, in a dugout at the youth league baseball field on Wixon Middle School grounds in Dennis in December of 1996. At the time, prosecutors said he already had a history of violence and was serving a suspended sentence for assault in Dennis.

He was 18 years old at the time.

In 2000, Defendant was placed on probation for two years for assault and battery on a police officer in Barnstable. In 2007, he was charged with two violations of a protective order. In August, charges were filed for his failure to register his address with Dennis police. During a routine check to verify sex offender addresses, police found that he had left a Dennisport apartment just before his eviction for owing $2,196 in back rent according to court records

On Monday, the police say that they were on their way to respond to a 911 call about Defendant. En route, a Harwich officer saw and pursued him on foot to a backyard near Willow and Belmont Streets The officer ordered him to stop and then shot him once in the hip after what police called "a confrontation." Harwich Police Lt. Thomas Gagnon said Defendant appeared to have a weapon and the officer shot in self-defense. Asked if that weapon had been a knife, as rumored, O'Keefe said the matter is under investigation.

Defendant was last reported as in stable condition at Cape Cod Hospital, according to David Reilly, a spokesman for Cape Cod Healthcare, and had been admitted to the hospital. When he is able to leave the hospital, he will face arraignment of a number of offenses related to the domestic disturbance, according to Cape and Islands District Attorney Michael O'Keefe. The still-unidentified Harwich police officer who shot him is on three days' administrative leave after a check-up at Cape Cod Hospital, as department policy requires, Harwich Police Chief William Mason said.

Meanwhile, Marcus M is being described by others somewhat differently from the above described walking crime wave. They seem to know him beyond his identity as “Defendant”. Several of his friends have come forward, albeit unnamed, to describe him as "harmless," "selfless," and "caring”, They even say he is responsible and trustworthy enough to baby-sit their young children on a regular basis. The kids know him as "Uncle Marky."

They claim he is a responsible father to his daughter off-Cape, and was constantly trying to better himself by working as a landscaper for many years and, in the meantime, working toward a college degree. "He'd do anything for anybody," said one close friend. "He's a good person. He's got a good heart. He's not greedy. Marcus baby-sat my kids. If he was crazy, I wouldn't have let him. Don't believe everything you hear."

"Marcus is a genuine person," said another close friend. "He would never hurt anyone intentionally. It's mind-boggling that this is happening right now."

In his Facebook profile, he said he lives in Dennis and works as a foreman at a Harwich landscaping company. He graduated in 1999 from Cape Cod Regional Technical School in Harwich, the profile says, and currently is studying criminal justice at Kaplan University, an online university.

SAM’S TAKE:

Perhaps Uncle Marky’s most recent foray with law enforcement was merely an independent study in connection with his criminal justice studies.

Sarcastic attempts at humor aside, we seem to have a contradictory picture of Defendant. After all, the picture of a violent sex offender who keeps fighting with police hardly matches the picture of Uncle Marky, neighborhood harmless babysitter who would “do anything for anybody”.

I have been a Boston criminal defense attorney since 1990. Before that, I worked as a prosecutor in the Big Apple. I have seen more than a few criminal defendants in my time.

The truth? They are all people. Like the rest of us, they are three dimensional people who have various different sides and react to circumstances before them. The accused are not an alien people who are “pre-destined” to always be in trouble. They were not born with a scarlet letter “D” (for “Defendant”) on their chests.

In other circumstances, they might be people you like. In others, they might actually be you.

So what’s my point?

This is not a plea to understand and sympathize with the “criminal element”. It is a plea for you to realize that anyone, even someone you love and consider “selfless” could find themselves under suspicion, or even guilty of, a crime. In fact, even you could find yourself in that position.

I am still amazed when clients tell me that they have nothing to worry about because they believe that they have not done anything wrong. I cannot tell you how many clients tell me, “You know, I am not really a criminal”, as we wait for the jury to return. The problem is that there is no neon sign above people’s heads indicating levels of guilt. Actions can be misinterpreted and I have yet to meet the person who’s history, recent or distant, cannot be said to contain guilt.

I realize that the story chosen to illustrate this point today is extreme. It seems to present a career violent criminal contrasted with his friends and neighbors ready to elect him as the next Mr. Rogers. However, I have handled many cases where the person least likely to be accused of a crime is knee deep in the trenches of the criminal justice system. I also believe that many of these people were guilty only of bad judgment or simply bad circumstances. Many were not guilty. But there they were. With me. Facing judgment which may or may not reflect the truth.

The fact is that everyone involved in the criminal justice system, from the judges and jury to the prosecutors and defense attorneys, and even to the police officers and defendants, are multi-dimensional human beings. They can all make mistakes of judgment…or misinterpret such mistakes. Understanding this is key to successfully interacting with the system. Understanding it of the judge, jury, police officer and prosecutor, and utilizing it to my client’s advantage, is my job. Your job is to realize that there is no invisible Teflon-coated bubble which insulates you from prosecution because you are a good person who tries to be law-abiding in all respects and believes nobody could ever presume you guilty.

Any of us can be at risk, at the very least, misinterpretation. Further, other realities of the system (such as prejudice, personal vendetta and the omnipresent need for people to cover their own backside) can encourage such misinterpretation.

This is why, if you suspect that you are under investigation, I strongly urge you to consult with an experienced defense attorney so that you can do your best to protect yourself from what will likely be a negative life-changing event. You can say that such a view is paranoia. But remember the old adage ….”just because you are paranoid does not mean that they are not out to get you”.

The full article of this story can be found at
http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081001/NEWS/810010326

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Assault , Assault and Battery , Criminal Law , Domestic Violence , Felonies and Violent Crimes , Illegal Weapons Possession , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations , Restraining Orders , Sexual Assault , Sexual Crimes

Bookmark:

The “wild west” has long been associated with images of folks making their own rules and bravely trying to tame the frontier. It would appear that two Western Massachusetts gentlemen had similar attitudes…although, according to the police, their actions would be more aligned with untaming than taming the area.

Let’s start with this past Friday in Springfield. 30-year old Ricardo M., (hereinafter, “Defendant”) was observed by police officers while allegedly ducking down inside a car near 86 Maple Street. When simply nestling under the dashboard did not work, he decided to jump out of the car and lead the police on a foot chase. This, however, did not make his situation dire enough, so he took the extra alleged step of breaking into an elderly woman’s apartment to hide.

She screamed. Police came. He was arrested.

Winning second place in the race, Defendant was awarded the runner-up prize, namely, charges of receiving a stolen motor vehicle (the ignition was found “popped” upon further investigation), breaking and entering in the nighttime with intent to commit a felony, possession of burglarious tools, driving with a suspended license, two counts of assault and battery on a police officer and resisting arrest. Oh yes, and a prize he had previously won, but never claimed – reunion with an outstanding parole warrant.

And so the Wild West Weekend began.

The Saturday Criminal Justice Races were held in Leominster. This race track did not include anyone’s apartment, but did include railroad tracks and all four lanes of Route 2.

The cause – at – issue for this life-threatening contest were charges for shoplifting videogames from a nearby shopping center.

Not surprisingly, the police won this race too. The runner-up prize was, once again, the Commonwealth’s bracelets of shame and additional criminal charges.

Sunday’s racing results have not yet been reported…or, at least, read.

SAM’S TAKE:

Perhaps I have not been clear enough in these daily blogs; that may well be the problem. Attorneys are supposed to be clear and try their best to make sure they are understood in these apparently complex and mysterious matters. Let me approach this way:

IF THE POLICE ARE SEEKING TO QUESTION OR DETAIN YOU, DO NOT RUN, HIDE, DRIVE, CRAWL, PUSH, SHOVE, ROLL OR ATTEMPT TO FLY AWAY. IT WILL ONLY MAKE MATTERS WORSE AND, OFTEN, BRING TO LIGHT THINGS THEY NEVER EVEN SUSPECTED!

If you have been apprehended or simply approached by the police…whether you are guilty of what you suspect their concerns are or not…engaging them in the Olympian way is not going to work. At best, you will win the runner-up prize of additional criminal charges. At worst, you could lose your life. You will certainly be further risking your liberty.

Nobody wants to be facing charges for receiving stolen property, violating parole or probation, shoplifting or the like. However, adding charges for resisting arrest, breaking and entering, assault and battery on a police officer and the like is hardly a profitable solution. It is, simply speaking, making a bad situation much worse.

“Self help” seldom works in the Criminal Justice system…especially for defendants. The way to minimize damage and help yourself is to comply with the officers and close your mouth until you get an experienced attorney to assist you. That’s right, no matter how golden a tongue you might feel you have, attempting to out-smart the officers to convince them why they should simply let you go will not work either. You will only give them more ammunition to use against you. That’s part of the reason for those Miranda Rights you’ve heard so much about.

I have been dealing with the myriad of cases the Criminal Justice system brings in for over twenty years. In the 1980’s, I was a prosecutor in two different states. Since the 1990’s, I have been a Boston criminal defense attorney handling cases in courts throughout Massachusetts. I cannot tell you how many cases I have handled in which, if the defendant simply was quiet and respectful to the police, the case could have ended early on with little to no damage but, because of a failed attempt to outsmart or outrun the police, the defendant was held in custody and faced heavier charges.

By the way, not only does trying to escape not work and bring additional charges, it also hurts you at trial. There is a doctrine called “Consciousness of Guilt” which prosecutors love to argue before judges and juries. The argument is that a person running to escape the police is evidence that they have a reason to do so…also known as guilt of what is being investigated.

To sum up, trying to run away from law enforcement is the anti-gift that keeps on “giving”. Get an experienced attorney with whom you are comfortable to help you deal with your problems in the trenches. The bottom line is that, without one, you are unarmed in the streets and the courtroom when dealing with these issues.

NOTE: The daily blog will not be so daily this week, I’m afraid. I will be unable to post on Tuesday and Wednesday due to the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashanah. However, I will be back and posting on Thursday.

Samuel Goldberg is the senior defense attorney at the firm of Altman & Altman, P.C. A former prosecutor in New York, he has worked as a defense attorney in Boston over 18 years. He frequently provides legal analysis on radio and television, appearing on outlets such as the Fox News Channel, Court TV, MSNBC and The BBC Network

The full articles of these stories can be found at
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/springfield_police_arrest_susp_6.html and http://www.telegram.com/article/20080928/DIGESTS/809280397/1005/NEWS06

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Assault , Assault and Battery , Criminal Law , Felonies and Violent Crimes , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations , Theft Crimes , Traffic Violations

Bookmark:

It has been a bad week so far for Massachusetts drug conspiracies. First, members of a joint Anti-Crime Task force confiscated 500 pounds of marijuana and more than $180,000 in cash from a weekend drug bust in Swansea, Massachusetts. The marijuana alone has a street value of more than $600,000. Then, in Holyoke, an Easthampton man and four Holyoke men were arrested Tuesday on charges including possession of heroin and possession of a loaded firearm.

After a month long investigation and 24-hour surveillance, John C. Mendonca, 38, of Fall River, who had been living at an East Providence hotel, was pulled over Saturday by an East Providence police officer. A search of his vehicle found prescription drugs, several cell phones and a box containing a large amount of cash. Search warrants were taken out for four of Mendonca’s known haunts, including two locations in East Providence and two in Fall River. The searches revealed a 2001 Dodge Caravan with 500 pounds of marijuana, a money counting machine believed to be tied to Mendonca’s alleged drug operation, 10 cell phones and a potpourri of additional drugs.

Mendonca is currently on federal probation from a 2002 drug bust. Swansea Deputy Police Chief Robert Furtado said police believe there were two men involved in Mendonca’s drug operation, but no one else has been charged. Furtado said because Mendonca was on federal probation, federal marijuana trafficking charges are being sought. Furtado also said that this was the biggest drug bust he said he has seen in more than three decades on the force .

Meanwhile, Holyoke law enforcement arrested Timothy Lipski, 21, of Easthampton and Manuel Quinones, 38, Alexander Sanabria, 32, Joseph Cartagena, 20 and Alejandro Ortiz Gonzalez, 24 all of Holyoke on Tuesday afternoon. The arrests were accompanied by the discovery of 132 bags of heroin with a street value of $1,320, $1,402 in cash, two guns with live ammunition, drug packing materials, and a small amount of marijuana.

Lipski, Sanabria and Ortiz Gonzalez are charged with possession of heroin. Sanabria is also charged with possession with intent to distribute heroin near a school zone or public park. Quinones is charged with possession to distribute heroin near a school zone or public park. Cartagena is charged with possession with intent to distribute heroin near a school zone or public park as well as two charges of possession of a loaded firearm and ammunition without proper identification.

Holyoke Police Chief Anthony R. Scott said the department had been conducting an investigation on the five men since August. Complaining that the bail set was too low, Scott said, "It is a shame that arrestee Timothy Lipski with his 11 rides on the Hampden County merry-go-round of justice was released after paying his bail of $100 plus his $20 Clerk Magistrate fee," Scott said. "Bail on the individual who was in illegal possession of the two firearms was set only at $5,000." He went on with, "These individuals have ridden on the Hampden County merry-go-round of justice for over fifty times and they are still walking the streets of our community while dealing in death and destruction," and finally ended with " Are the police and the assistant district attorneys the only individuals within our criminal justice system who care about the community?"

SAM’S TAKE:
Police Chief Scott’s plea to the heavens reveals something important about the different perspectives of the criminal justice system. As far as the police and prosecutors are concerned, all these defendants are guilty of all crimes charged and probably many more that are not charged. In fact, this was most likely the case early on in each investigation before they even made the arrests. However, the United States Constitution and the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights talk about inconvenient things like the presumption of innocence. To law enforcement, such “legalisms” are merely hindrances (until they, themselves find themselves investigated or charged) to their holy war against evil. To the rest of us, however, it is the necessary backbone of what calls itself a fair justice system.

We do not know all the facts and circumstances behind the charges. The chief purpose of bail is to ensure that the defendants appear in court while their innocence or guilt is being determined. If, indeed, these defendants have been on the “merry-go-round” that so upsets Chief Scott, their records should reflect whether they have a history of showing up in court to face charges. While I would not be so quick to call the bail imposed “chump change”, the fact that it is not higher, or that the defendants are not being held without bail, probably indicates that they were not on probation, did not have a bad record or even, dare I say it, there could be something wrong something wrong with the charges?

Ahh, if only the chief’s defendants could be more like Mendonca of Fall River! Mendonca had the good grace to be on probation and so is being held.

And this comparison is the main part of the today’s daily lesson.

The backdrop is clear…while we may talk about the presumption of innocence, law enforcement really does not subscribe to that particular formality. It is therefore unlikely that , if arrested, you are wise to try to “cooperate” unrepresented and rely on promises of “going easy” on you. Once you walk into that courtroom and deal with the issue of bail, the issues are going to be your history and whether you are likely to show up in court (other than in matters which involve dangerousness). Whether you tend to show up or are on probation will be what most likely dictates the bail imposed. I cannot tell you how many clients I have had simply shrug when asked about their record of defaults, advising me, “Oh, that’s ok. I cleared up that one a few months later”. It is the existence, not the circumstances or later cure of the default that causes a hike in bail. Bottom line: show up or you will be paying for it in the future.

Which brings us to the sentence of probation or its cousin, parole. Many people, including defense attorneys without much experience, seem to feel that getting probation as a sentence is a gift. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it is not. The fact is that if you are on probation and you are arrested (even if that arrest turns out to lead to a dismissal or acquittal), you are likely to be held on the new arrest without bail and held in violation of probation. The violation is the arrest itself. The court usually does not wait to see what happens with the new case to decide whether your probation violation will land you behind bars. In most cases, you will be found in violation long before you even get near trial in the new matter and likely held without bail on the probation surrender…or simply sent to jail to serve the sentence which you avoided by getting on probation.

These are all intricacies of the system that can change your life and make the difference between freedom and incarceration. If you feel you are being investigated, or have been approached with either questions or the bracelets of shame by law enforcement, you need an attorney with experience who can guide you through and increase your chances of freedom through all these issues.

The full articles of this story can be found at
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/09/five_men_arrested_in_holyoke_d.html and
http://www.heraldnews.com/police_and_fire/x348018887/Police-seize-500-pounds-of-marijuana?view=print

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Law , Drug Offenses , Federal Crimes , Illegal Weapons Possession , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations

Bookmark:

This week, we start our daily blog with an eye toward the north shore, where, according to the Salem News, last fall, Christopher Al-Nabulsi was a star at Salem High School. At 17, he was captain of the football and lacrosse teams, played basketball and was a peer mentor. And then he made a mistake which many assume would simply get him a “slap on the wrist”.

It Didn’t.

In December, a 15-year-old schoolmate paid Christopher $15 for a bag of marijuana. She then informed the school officials of the transaction. They confronted him and he confessed. They then searched his backpack and found three more packets of marijuana. He was arrested and expelled from school. He was also charged with two counts of possession with intent to distribute in a school zone, each bringing a 2 year mandatory jail sentence (apart from the other charges which Christopher also faced).

Last week, Christopher, who had no prior record, pleaded guilty in Salem District Court to charges of possessing marijuana with the intent to distribute and received a suspended 2 ½ -year jail sentence and two years of probation. Violating any condition of his probation, including an order that he stay away from Salem High School, would result in facing the entire 2 ½ years in jail. Under Massachusetts law, such a violation is also caused by being accused of any additional criminal conduct. For example, if Christopher were to anger the wrong person or be at the wrong place/wrong time, the mere resulting arrest will be enough to send him to jail for the 2 ½ years…regardless of what happens down the road with the new charges. Despite being “presumed innocent” of these new charges, Christopher will await his day in court regarding them in jail.

According to Christopher’s attorney, The reason Christopher took the deal, was that the prosecutor agreed to drop the two school zone counts. He also said, "The entire school community has turned their back on him," For example, when Christopher’s former football coach wanted to write a letter of support for the teen, he was told by school officials that he could not do so. Christopher lost contact with former friends and teachers, especially since he will be violated on his probation should he go near the school.

“The school abandoned a 17-year-old boy," the lawyer said. "It's been devastating and will have ramifications for years to come."

Sam’s take:

Regardless of your level of sympathy for Christopher, this is a cautionary tale which debunks many misconceptions which are well worth noting, especially as we start the new school year.

Whatever your view about marihuana, the possession of it is illegal. Secondly, the sharing, giving or selling of it is “distribution” under Massachusetts law and is treated harshly, as with other drug cases. In this case, a 17 year old kid with a clean record faced up to four years in minimum mandatory sentences over and above the potential jail terms which he faced for the charges that had discretionary sentences. Let me put that in a less “lawyer-like” way. Had he exercised his Constitutional right to a trial, and was found guilty, the judge would have had no legal choice but to sentence him to at least four years in jail. After that four years (minimum), he would have had the pleasure of restarting his life…four years further into adulthood with a criminal record, the label “drug dealer” and a curtailed education.

Any drug case, no matter how much one argues it to be a kid’s “stupid mistake”, must be considered serious and potentially life-altering. The fact that youth brings with it a certain lack of judgment at times is a consideration that has long since left the halls of the Justice System. The same is true with any consideration for “manning up” and admitting to the crime as Christopher did. Unfortunately, such honesty, while perhaps good for the soul, is bad for the criminal record.

If you even suspect you may be facing drug charges, whatever your opinion about your chance of being convicted or that it is simply “no big deal”, it is best to get an experienced attorney at the earliest moment if you have any interest in improving your chances in the halls of justice.

Samuel Goldberg is the senior criminal defense attorney at the firm of Altman & Altman, P.C. A former prosecutor in New York, he has worked as a defense attorney in Boston over 18 years. He frequently provides legal analysis on radio and television, appearing on outlets such as the Fox News Channel, Court TV, MSNBC and The BBC Network

The full article of this story can be found at
http://www.salemnews.com/punews/local_story_249003857.html

Posted by Altman & Altman | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Criminal Law , Drug Offenses , Felonies and Violent Crimes , Misdemeanors , Probation Violations

Bookmark: