In my previous blogs, I have told you that similar cases do not always receive similar treatment. As a Boston criminal lawyer for many years, I have seen this play out. Sometimes, it has angered me…sometimes I have been grateful. Let’s see what you think about this one.
Let’s look at the case of Addis Woldeguioroui (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). He is the 51-year-old Dorchester gentleman charged with crashing a van of special needs adults into a garbage truck while allegedly high on illegal Massachusetts drugs. According to law enforcement, he was found in possession of a pipe containing cocaine residue and an empty Oxycodone container in his bag,
The accident occured on 116 Highland St. in Newton earlier this week.
The Defendant, the talkative sort, allegedly told investigating officers police the accident took place because a solar glare made him lose sight of the truck. The collision sent 13 people to the hospital, including the driver and three who were transported to Beth Israel Deaconness Medical Center with serious injuries. Apparently, said passengers have been released or are in fair condition, according to court documents.
Officers say they also found a pipe containing cocaine residue and an empty Oxycodone container in the Defendant’s bag and charged him with Massachusetts operating under the influence as well as charging relating to his causing serious injury, negligence, and possession of Class B drugs.
He is looking at a possible 10 years in prison.
The Defendant also allegedly told police he had taken one or two Oxycodone pills prescribed by a doctor for pain around 5:30 yesterday morning. According to him the pills are for foot pain. The Commonwealth is waiting for results of the blood test taken at the hospital..
After the accident, the Defendant found himself in Newton District Court to be arraigned on his charges. In previous blogs, I have discussed the pros and cons of talking with trying to out-talk or out-reason police officers on the streets. I never thought it necessary to tell you that it is unwise to ignore your lawyer’s advice and try to do it with a judge and prosecutor.
However, that is what the Defendant did.
Speaking about those in the van, the Defendant explained, “The people [in the crash] were my people…I carry their blood on me.”
When confronted with his previous criminal record in New York and Massachusetts (dating back to 1977) for incidentals like armed robbery as well as a pending arrest warrant from West Roxbury District Court, he insisted on responding, explaining that “The past, that is what it is, the past…I’ve had some difficulties, and I’ve overcome them.”
Indeed, the Defendant served in the Air Force from 1978 to 1981. In court, he was supported by his girlfriend, who clung to a bible and to freshly-pressed clothes, that she was not allowed to give to him.
The Defendant was held on $5,000 bail, half of what prosecutors had requested. The prosecutor also argued that his bail in his earlier case should be revoked, but the court decided against hat. She did, however, forbid the Defendant from driving should he be released.
“He’s a good guy. He’s lived a tough life,” the Defendant’s girlfriend explains.. “He loved his job. . . . He was trying to get his life together.
Usually, when a defendant appears before a court and there is a warrant out for their arrest because of their failing to appear, the defendant’s bail in the previous case is revoked and is held without bail on that matter. This is independent of the bail set in the new case.
Further, the fact that the Defendant in this case is such a wild card that he ignored his attorney’s advice and insisted on addressing the court generally does not help. It often leads to higher bail…sometimes even the need to be observed by the court clinic.
While the court did post a five thousand dollar bail during the bail hearing, it could have gone far worse for the Defendant.
“Why didn’t it, Sam?”
I have been before the Judge Dyanne Klein in Newton District Court many times. This Boston criminal lawyer can tell you that she is one of the fairest judges in the Commonwealth. More important than my personal views of fairness, she is undeniably one of the more attentive and measured members of the bench. She does not tend to act out of kneejerk reaction or anger.
In this case, she had reason to set the bail she did, although she did not go overboard with her decision.
Do you see the various Massachusetts search and seizure issues in this case? How do you think they are likely to work out? Maybe we can get to them later this week.
To view the article upon which this blog is based, please go to http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1355906&srvc=rss