by

On April 29, 2024, JV, a 30 year old environmental consultant, was driving his car on Rt. 113 in Methuen. Another vehicle was following him very closely and then passed him in a no pass zone. The two cars then played cat and mouse. JV then found himself in front of the other car and then the other car passed by him and cut JV off almost causing a collision. JV then pulled alongside the other vehicle and threw a metal speaker at the other vehicle, striking the other vehicle, and putting a dent in the other vehicle. The two vehicles pulled over and the police were called and responded within minutes. JV admitted to the police that he had thrown the metal speaker at the other vehicle. The police charged JV with Malicious Destruction to a Motor Vehicle. The problem with this particular charge is that it carries a 1 year loss of license and it cannot be continued without a finding.

JV consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately obtained the police reports and more importantly the police body cam recordings from the scene. The body cam recordings very helpful. They showed that the driver of the other vehicle was a raving lunatic. In addition, another motorist stopped at the scene and spoke to the police and said that the other driver was driving like a madman and that he had cut her off as well. Although that did not excuse JV’s throwing the metal speaker, it provided context to the entire episode.

Prior to the court date, Attorney Lewin met with the DA and had insisted that the DA watch the police body cam, which the DA did. In addition, Attorney had asked the DA to reduce the charge to simple destruction of personal property (which carries NO loss of license). In addition, Attorney Lewin asked the DA to dismiss the case.

Continue reading

by

On November 9, 2024, EP, a 54 year old union carpenter, went to a restaurant in Methuen with his extended family. While at the restaurant he saw SP, a similarly aged man, who had had a number of confrontations with EP’s brother. At one point EP left his table and went to the men’s room. As EP was about to leave the men’s room SP entered the men’s room. The two men exchanged words with one another and then the stories diverged. A fight broke out between the two men; the restaurant management broke up the fight and escorted the two men out of the restaurant; and the police were called and responded quickly to the restaurant. EP told the police that SP had chest bumped him as he was trying to leave the men’s room and EP had simply pushed SP out of his way so he could leave the men’s room. SP told the police that EP had grabbed him by the throat and punched him in the face. SP told the police he wanted charges filed against EP.

The police charged both men with Assault & Battery. EP consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately obtained copies of the police report and Attorney Lewin spoke with the police prosecutor. The two cases were set up for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing at Lawrence District Court. On January 7, 2025 EP and Attorney Lewin arrived at Court for the hearing. SP was also present but did not have a lawyer. Attorney Lewin went over to SP and had a conversation with SP. Attorney Lewin explained to SP that if the two men went ahead with the hearing that the Clerk-Magistrate would issue criminal complaints against both men and then both men would have to return to court and criminal records would be created against both men. Attorney Lewin said that if SP and EP agreed not to go forward that it was very likely that the Clerk-Magistrate would not issue a criminal complaint against either man. SP, who could be a stubborn man, saw the light and agreed with Attorney Lewin’s suggestion.

The case was called into the hearing room. The Clerk-Magistrate had the police prosecutor read the police report. The police report clearly set out probable cause for the Clerk-Magistrate to issue criminal complaints against both men for Assault & Battery. The Clerk-Magistrate then turned to Attorney Lewin and requested his input. Attorney Lewin explained to the Clerk-Magistrate that he had spoken to both men, and both men were requesting that the Clerk-Magistrate not issue complaints. In addition, Attorney Lewin had also spoken to the police prosecutor and the police prosecutor stated to the Clerk-Magistrate that he had no objection to Attorney Lewin’s suggestion.

Continue reading

by

CP, a 35 year old male, and his husband, GP, a 43 year old male, have been married for 5 years. There were considerable tensions in the marriage. On January 8, 2025, GP, applied for an Abuse Prevention Order in Lawrence District Court and was granted a temporary order. The order was scheduled for a two party hearing on January 22, 2025. CP was served with the order and immediately sought out a lawyer.  CP met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.

Attorney Lewin immediately went over to Lawrence District Court and obtained a copy of GP’s complaint and affidavit. Attorney Lewin and CP went thorough GP’s affidavit together. It was readily apparent that GP was not alleging any physical abuse. Under a 2024 change in the law, physical abuse is no longer required to obtain an order. The 2024 change in the law added “coercive control” as a basis for obtaining an Abuse Prevention Order. This is what GP was alleging in his complaint. The new law defines “Coercive Control” as follows:

  • “(a) a pattern of behavior intended to threaten, intimidate, harass, isolate, control, coerce or compel compliance of a family or household member that causes that family or household member to reasonably fear physical harm or have a reduced sense of physical safety or autonomy, including, but not limited to:
Continue reading

by

On December 29, 2023, MF, a 35 year old nursing student, was stopped by the State Police on Route 1 in Saugus. The police cited him for an array of offenses:

  • Operating an Uninsured Motor Vehicle
  • Operating a Motor Vehicle After Suspension of  the Registration
Continue reading

by

RS, a 79 year old retired engineer, enjoys hiking in the forests of Essex County, MA. The problem is he enjoys hiking naked. You could not make this case up. The environmental police had received several complaints of a man hiking in the nude. Unbeknownst to RS, a hunter had lawfully installed a hunting camera on a tree in the woods. The camera captured RS hiking nude on four occassions between August 2024 and October 2024. On one of his hikes, RS noticed the camera and took it down and brought it home. Unfortunately for RS the camera did two things that RS did not expect: (1) it captured him nude at home and sent those images to the hunter’s computer and (2) it sent out its GPS coordinates to the hunter’s computer. The hunter in turn gave the images and the GPS coordinates to the Environmental Police. The GPS coordinates led the police to RS’s home. The police got a search warrant, went to RS’s home, seized the camera, and charged RS with a host of crimimal offenses. The criminal charges included Hunter Harassment (the removing of the camera), Larceny (the taking of the camera), and 4 counts of indecent exposure. The case was set up for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing.

RS met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately reached out to the Environmental Police and, more importantly, Attorney Lewin contacted the General Counsel’s Office for the state office of environmental affairs. Attorney Lewin was able to make contact with the Assistant General Counsel for the Department who would make the decision about whether the case would go forward or not. In addition, Attorney Lewin had RS meet with a counselor who dealt with exhibitionist behavior; the counselor gave Attorney Lewin a very favorable report. Attorney Lewin engaged in lengthy negotiations with the Department and was able to get the Department to agree to recommend that a criminal complaint NOT be issued against RS.

On December 12, 2024, RS and Attorney Lewin appeared at Lawrence District Court for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing on the Application for Criminal Complaint that had been filed by the Environmental Police.  The environmental police were present and presented their detailed case against RS. Attorney Lewin explained to the Clerk-Magistrate the lengthy negotiations that had taken place with the Department and the agreement that had been reached.

Continue reading

by

On October 17, 2024, IS, a 33 year old counselor was stopped in North Andover for speeding and operating an uninsured motor vehicle. IS has a substantial motor vehicle record and a finding against him would have caused his license to be suspended. To his credit, within two days of getting the citation IS got his car insured and got the registration renewed (the police did not charge him with the offense of operating an unregistered vehicle). IS failed to request a clerk-magistrate hearing and a criminal complaint issued against him. IS received a summons in the mail to appear in Lawrence Distrioct Court for an arraignment on Decembedr 20, 2024. IS consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.

Attorney Lewin, with assistance from IS, gathered together all the necessary paperwork (the new insurance policy showing that it was purcahsed two days after the incident as well as the new registration certificate). On December 20, 2024 IS and Attorney Lewin went to Lawrence District Court for the arraignment. Attorney Lewin met with the Assistant District Attorney and furnished copies of the new insurance policy and the new registration to the Assistant DA. At Attorney Lewin’s request, the Assistant District Attorney agreed to DISMISS the uninsured motor vehicle charge prior to arraignment and the Assistahnt DA agreed to enter a finding of NOT responsible on the speeding charge. This was the very best of all possible results.

By dismissing the case prior to arraignment this case did NOT go onto IS’s crimimal record. In addition, IS did not suffer any penalty against his driver’s license from the Registry of Motor Vehicles. It was a complete win.

Continue reading

by

On August 5, 2024, JT, a 40 year old Nurse was living in Cambridge. JT owned a car but was not using it and had it parked in her driveway. In Massachusetts you must have a car registered and insured in order to legally park it in your driveway. The car was in fact insured; however, it was not registered. She had an old set of out of state plates that belonged to her boyfriend. She attached those plates to the car to make it appear as if the car was registered. On the night of August 5, 2024 JT and her boyfriend got into an argument and he left their apartment. JT went out to look for him and fired up the car and drove into Boston looking for him. She got pulled over for speeding by the State Police. That is when the trouble started. The State Trooper ran the plates that were on the car and discovered they came back to another vehicle that did not belong to her. The Trooper ordered her out of the car; had the car towed; and cited her for two criminal offenses (wrongfully attaching plates and operating an uninsured vehicle) and two civil infractions (speeding and operating an unregistered vehicle). JT failed to request a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing (big mistake – as the case probably could have been resolved at a Clerk-Maguistrate Hearing without any charges beuing issued against her). The case was set down for an arraignment on Tuesday, December 3, 2024. JT failed to appear for her arraignment and a warrant for her arrest was issued at Brighton Municipal Court. The Court then notified JT that a warrant for her arrest had been issued by the court.

On Thursday evening, December 12, 2024, JT contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. The next day, Friday, December 13, 2024, Attorney Lewin obtained copies of the police report and all the court papers. It was immediately obvious to Attorney Lewin that the police had failed to comply with the no-fix ticket law.  That law requires the police, among other things, to file the citation with the court within 6 business days of the violation. (Most lawyers have never even heard of the six day rule – but Attorney Robert Lewin knows the rule well and uses it all the time to get cases dismissed.) Over the weekend, Attorney Lewin prepared a Motion to Dismiss ALL the charges against JT due to the police failure to comply with the six day rule.

On Tuesday, December 17, 2024, Attormey Lewin and JT appeared in Boston Municipal Court – Brighton Division. Attorney Lewin had his Motion to Dismiss all prepared and ready to file at Court. First, however, Attorney Lewin went down to the District Attorney’s Office to speak with the Assistant District Attorney. Attorney Lewin had documents to show that the car was now fully registered and insured (and that it was insured on the date JT was pulled over). Attorney Lewin explained to the Assistant DA that JT had no crimimal record, that she was a nurse, and that she was now enrolled in a graduate (Masters) degree nursing program. The Assistant DA told Attorney Lewin that the Commonwealth would agree to the warrant being cancelled, the two criminal charges being DISMISSED prior to arraignment, and that findings of NOT responsible could be entered on the two civil violations. It was a complete and total win – and Attorney Lewin never took the Motion tio Dismiss out of his briefcase!

Continue reading

by

FL is a 26 year old Academic Advisor at a local college. FL is also a compulsive shoplifter. On June 10, 2024, June 11, 2024, and again on July 29, 2024 FL was caught on camera shoplifting at a local Target store. Store security was not able to stop FL as he left the store, but they did get a license plate number of the car he was driving as he left the parking lot. The plate number was turned over to the Lowell Police and they traced the plate back to FL. On August 1, 2024 the police went to FL’s home and quickly identified FL as the person caught on the security cameras at the store.  When questionned FL told the police that he may have failed – by mistake(!) – to scan several items. What the security video actually showed was FL scanning the tag of an inexpensive item several times while putting more expensive items into his shoppinjg bag as if the more expensive items had been scanned. The police told FL that he would receive a notice to go to court.

Within days, FL received a notice of a Magistrate’s Hearing alleging three counts of shoplifting. The hearing was scheduled for Friday, December 6, 2024 at Lowell District Court. FL contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately obtained a copy of the police report. Attorney Lewin contacted the Lowell Police Prosecutor to discuss the case and Attorney Lewin also reached out to the Asset Protection team at Target. Attorney Lewin took a full background history from FL. It was immediately apparent to Attorney Lewin that if FL were actually charged with shoplifting (which would brand FL as a THIEF) that his job as an Academic Advisor would be lost.

On December 6, 2024 FL and Attorney Lewin appeared at Lowell District Court for the Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin explained FL’s background to the Clerk-Magistratem, stressing the facts that he had no criminmal record, that he had a good education, and that he had a good job. Attorney Lewin asked the Clerk-Magistrate NOT to issue a crimimal complainmt. Prior to the hearing Attorney Lewin had spoken with the police prosecutor (this is called good case preparation). After Attorney Lewin made his pitch to the Clerk-Magistrate, the Police Prosecutor told the Clerk-Magistrate that he had no objection to what Attorney Lewin was requesting.  The Clerk-Magistrate then continued the hearing for 3 months to March 14, 2025. The Magistrate then ordered that if FL stayed out of trouble with the law, then on Mardch 14, 2025 no one had to return to court and the matter would be dismissed without a criminal complaint being issued agasinst FL.

Continue reading

by

On March 27, 2024,CG, a 53 year old nurse from Beverly, was driving from her home in Beverly to Shop & Shop. It was in the mid-afternoon. As she traveled down a residential street, she noticed a small truck with a trailer attached, parked on the right hand side of the street. As she passed by the truck she heard a bang. She did not see anyone around and she continued down the street. She went to Stop & Shop and in the parking lot she noticed that her passenger side mirror was damaged and that pieces of the mirror were missing. She then returned to the place where the truck had been. She slowly drove by and did not notice the police officer and man that were standing off to the side. She did not stop and continued home. The man who’s truck had been hit actually got CG’s plate number and a description of her car at the time of the crash and gave that information to the police. The Beverly police then issued a citation to CG for leaving the scene of a property damage accident and no inspection sticker. (The inspection sticker on her car had expired.) CG failed to attend a Clerk-Magistrate hearing (big mistake) and a criminal complaint was issued against her for leaving the scene and no inspection sticker. CG met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.

Attorney Lewin immediately began his investigation of the case. It turned out that the damage to the truck was quite minor. There was a ladder on the back of the trailer that was knocked loose. The ladder simply needed to be reattached to the back of the trailer. Attorney Lewin spoke to CG’s insurance company to determine if any claim had been made and none was made. Attorney Lewin then met with the Assistant DA handling the case and was able to get the Assistant DA to agree to what is called a “general continuance” of the case. A general continuance is when the case is simply left open for a period opt time and then dismissed. It is NOT a plea bargain. There is no guilty plea; there is no admission of any kind. At the end of the period of time the case is dismissed. Attorney Lewin calls a “general continuance” a dismissal that takes a little time to get there. (It is quite different from a “cwof – a continuance without a finding”. A cwof is a plea bargain and involves an admission of guilt; a general continuance involves no admissions of guilt at all.)

On October 11, 2024, CG and Attorney Lewin appeared  in Salem District Court and the Judge continued CG’s case generally for six months. At that time – if CG stays out of trouble – the criminal charge of Leaving the Scene will be DISMISSED. In addition, the Judge entered a finding of NOT responsible on the inspection sticker violation. Attorney Lewin explained that right after this incident CG went and had her car inspected and got a sticker.

Continue reading

by

On August 15, 2024, BS, a 57 year old professional woman, went to the Target store in Danvers. She shopped and filled up a shopping cart with merchandise. She then went to the self-checkout area and began to scan her items. When she was done scanning she paid $313.64 on her credit card and then headed out of the store. Just as she got out of the store she was stopped by store security and then brought back into the store to the loss prevention office. There was $276.87 in merchandise in her cart that she had not paid for. There was video of her at the self-checkout which allegedly showed her not scanning certain items. BS was told she would receive a notice from the Salem District Court. BS consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.

BS insisted that she did not intentionally fail to scan anything. Apparently there were some items at the bottom of her cart that she mistakenly forgot to scan. The Danvers Police had been called to the store and Attorney Lewin was able to obtain a copy of the Danvers Police report. That report seemed to corroborate what BS was saying. Attorney Lewin made contact with the loss prevention officer form the store and advocated for the store not to seek a criminal complaint.

On September 20, 2024, BS and Attorney Lewin appeared at Salem District Court for the hearing. Attorney Lewin was thoroughly prepared. Attorney Lewin furnished a copy of the Danvers Police Report to the Clerk Magistrate. That report (which the store did not want the Clerk-Magistrate to see) corroborated what BS was saying.

Continue reading
Contact Information
18 Kathleen Dr
Andover, MA 01810
Phone: 978-258-3520
Fax: 978-258-4565
E-mail Us
Map & Directions

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2025, Lewin & Lewin
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design