by

On August 2, 2026, EK, a 19 year old man, was operating his Kawasaki Ninja in Middleton. He was travelling at about 100 mph into a turn. The bike was leaned far to the left so that his leg was barely scraping the ground when he lost control of the bike. The bike skidded across the road striking an oncoming car on the side. The bike, with EK still on it, went over a guard rail on the side of the road and then travelled back onto the road and came to a stop in the roadway on top of EK. EK’s leg was severely injured and he was taken from the scene to a hospital. His right calf was “degloved”; the skin and fat underneath were completely pulled off exposing the calf muscle. (To this date, October 18, 2026, he is still recovering.) No one in the vehicle he struck was injured. The police cited EK with Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle, Speeding, and A Marked Lanes Violation. EK received a summons to appear in Salem District Court for an arraignment on October 7, 2026.

EK works in an auto shop and he absolutely needs his license to work. This was his third surchargeable accident and the registry is requiring him to take the Driver Retraining Program within 90 days to avoid an indefinite suspension of his license. In addition, if he is found guilty of the Negligent Operation charge he will lose his license for 60 days (with NO hardship exemption). In addition, EK has no criminal record and he wanted to keep his record clean. EK and his parents consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover to defend EK in Salem District Court.

Attorney Lewin immediately went to work on the case and went to Salem District Court to view the court papers. Attorney Lewin sensed there was a procedural error in the way the criminal complaint was issued against EK. When a person is charged with a misdemeanor (such as Negligent Operation) and the person has not been arrested, in the absence of certain conditions not present in EK’s case, the person must be afforded a Clerk-Magistrate hearing before a crimimal complaint can be issued.  EK had not been arrested and the criminal complaint against him had been issued without a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin prepared and filed a Motion to Dismiss the case (along with the required Affidavit of Facts and Memorandum of Law). Attorney Lewin explained to EK and his parents that he was doing this to gain leverage with the DA in the case. If the Motion were allowed and case dismissed, the police could refile the charges against EK and he would get his Clerk-Magistrate Hearing and in all likelihood the Clerk-Magistrate would issue a new criminal complaint and we would be right back to where we were. BUT, Attorney Lewin explained to EK and his parents, the police may not want to do that extra work and the DA may not want to bother the police with that extra work. So Attorney Lewin approached the DA and opened up a discussion with the DA about resolving the case in a manner that EK would get NO criminal record, NOT lose his license, and the charges against him – all three of them – would ultimately be dismissed. A crimimal record gets created when an arraignment takes place. Attorney Lewin and the District Attorney agreed on pre-trial diversion.

Continue reading

by

AM is a 17 year old private school student with a Junior Operator License. He drives himself back and forth to school five days a week and needs his license. On July 16, 2026, he was caught speeding in the Town of Essex, estimated speed of 60 mph in a 30 mph zone. He was pulled over by the police and given a citation for speeding. He and his parents learned that if he was found responsible for the speeding ticket he would lose his JOL (junior operator license) for 90 days. Both of his parents work and he needed to be able to drive himself to get back and forth to school. AM appealed the citation and requested a hearing before a Clerk-Magistrate at Gloucester District Court.

AM and his parents contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin told them there was much that could be done to convince the Clerk-Magistrate not to find AM responsible. Attorney Lewin had AM and his parents furnish Attorney Lewin with the following documents:

  • AM’s RMV driver record – it was clean.
Continue reading

by

TB, a 62 year old property manager, was accused of Larceny from a Person (a felony), Assault and Battery, and Assault with a Dangerous Weapon (another felony) for an incident occurring on August 31, 2026 in North Andover. The complaining witness called the police and said that TB, a man whom he claims he had known for decades, came to his home in North Andover and beat him and stole a hat from him. An independent witness corroborated the account. And the incident was captured on a surveillance video. The North Andover police investigated and secured a warrant from Lawrence District Court for TB’s arrest. TB lives in NH. TB received a notice of the warrant.

TB consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover, MA. Attorney Lewin immediately obtained a copy of the police report. TB INSISTED that he was not the person in the police report. TB said he did not know the complaining witness and most importantly TB said that he was at work in Wilmington, MA at the time of the alleged crimes in North Andover. TB was a great client. TB furnished Attorney Lewin time and date stamped photos from surveillance cameras at his workplace that clearly show him in Wilmington, MA on the date and at the time of the alleged offenses. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the North Andover detective who had brought the charges against TB and who had secured a  warrant for TB’s arrest. Attorney Lewin furnished the North Andover Detective with pictures of TB and with the photos from TB’s workplace and said to the North Andover detective “You can’t be in two places at once.”

The very next day (48 hours after Attorney Lewin was hired) the warrant was cancelled and the District Attorney at Lawrence District Court withdrew the charges. As a result TB never had to go to Court and no entry was made on TB’s criminal record.

Continue reading

by

On July 8, 2026, JV was in the Middlesex Probate Court in Lowell for a hearing on whether the Abuse Prevention Order his wife had taken out against him would be extended. The order – among other things – ordered JV not to have contact with his wife. No contact – among other things – includes not speaking to her. JV was representing himself (big mistake – a good lawyer could have succeeded in defeating the extension of the order). JV is very strong willed (translate stubborn) and can be loud. As the hearing progressed, JV would talk over the Judge and had to be cautioned by the Judge and the Court Officers several times to remain silent (translate shut up) when the Judge was talking. At the end of the hearing the Judge ruled that he was extending the order for an additional 90 days. JV was very upset. The Court Officers escorted JV to a seat in the court room gallery. The Court Officers then escorted JV’s wife out of the courtroom. As JV’s wife approached the bench where JV was sitting JV said “I’ll see you in Superior Court”. The Judge immediately responded – that is a violation of the order, you spoke directly to her. JV said I was talking to you (the Judge), but the Judge was not hearing it. The Judge directed the Court Officers to apply for a criminal complaint against JV for Violation of An Abuse Prevention Order. JV was lucky that the court officers did not arrest him on the spot. He was allowed to leave and told he would receive a notice to go to the District Court for a criminal charge of Violation of the Order.

Five days later on July 13, 2026 the Lowell District Court issued a Notice of Hearing on an application for a criminal complaint that had been filed by the Court Officer from the Probate Court. The hearing was scheduled for 9/11/2026. JV met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. It normally takes upwards of 6 months to get a hearing date in Lowell District Court. When Attorney Lewin saw how quickly this hearing had been scheduled, Attorney Lewin told JV somebody put their thumb on the scale to push this case quickly. This was a Judge and a Court Officer on the 5th floor of the Lowell Courthouse asking a Clerk-Magistrate on the 3rd floor of the same courthouse to charge JV with a crime that allegedly occurred in the building. Attorney Lewin thoroughly prepared the case and obtained a copy of the recording of the proceedings in the probate court from back on July 8, 2026. Sure enough you could hear JV say “I’ll see you in Superior Court.”

On September 11, 2026, JV and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell District Court for a Hearing before the Clerk-Magistrate to determine whether a criminal complaint would be issued against JV. The Court Officer was present and read his report to the Clerk-Magistrate. The Clerk-Magistrate then turned to Attorney Lewin. Attorney Lewin was well prepared. He pointed out that the statement that JV had made was made in a moment of frustration with the Probate Court Judge’s ruling extending the Abuse Prevention Order. That the statement did not contain any threat of harm or violence. Attorney suggested that the Clerk-Magistrate not issue a criminal complaint, but rather continue the hearing for a short period of time and then – if there are no other violations of the law – the application for complaint could be denied and no complaint would be issued.

Continue reading

by

On May 18, 2026, ET, a 67 year old administrative employee for a pharmaceutical company, went to the Target store in Wilmington. As she had done on several prior occassions she had a number of items in her cart and proceded through the self check out area. She scanned two items and did not scan the remaining items and placed all the items in a bag and headed for the door. She was stopped by store security and brought back to the loss prevention office. Using their facial recognition software they were able to identify ET as having shoplifted on a number of prior occasions. The Wilmington Police responded to the store and took ET’s information and told her she would receive a notice to go to court. ET was served with a written NO TRESPASS order from the store and was then allowed to leave the store.

ET researched lawyers and then met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately obtained a copy of the police report and reviewed it with ET. As he always does, Attorney Lewin reached out to the police prosecutor and discussed the case with him. The aim of the discussion was to try to reach an agreement with the police to not have a criminal complaint be issued against ET.

The case was set down for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing at Woburn District Court. On August 5, 2026, ET and Attorney Lewin appeared at Woburn District Court for the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. The Assistant Clerk-Magistrate conducting the hearing asked the police prosecutor and Attorney Lewin if they had discussed a possible resolution of the case. The Police Prosecutor said yes and suggested continuing the hearing for three months and if ET stayed out of the store and did not get into any trouble with the law then the case could be dismissed and no one would have to return to court. Attorney Lewin confirmed that he and ET were in agreement with that proposal.

Continue reading

by

On December 23, 2025, WM, a 16 year old juvenile drove his car (a white Honda Accord) to the parking lot of a shopping plaza in Tewksbury. It was about 11:00 am and school had released early that day. There was a flock of seagulls gathered together in the parking lot. At about the same time the police received a 911 call of 2 dead seagulls in the parking lot. The police responded to the parking lot and observed the 2 dead seagulls. The police began an investigation and were able to obtain video footage from a number of the stores in the plaza. The police report recites: “I then observed … a white sedan believed to be a Honda Accord, enter the Aubuchon Hardware Parking lot from the south entrance. The vehicle then proceeds across multiple rows of empty parking spots directly towards the small area where the birds were located. The vehicle appears to acceleraste to an unreasonable speed for the area and intentionally strike the seagulls.” Through further investigation the police were able to identify WM as the operator of the vehicle that struck the birds. The police then conducted an interview with WM and one of his parents and he “admitted to seeing the birds, driving through them and striking them with his vehicle”.

The police charged WM in Lowell Juvenile Court with two counts of Animal Cruelty (a felony) and one count of Negligent Operation of a Motor Vehicle. WM’s parents met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin learned that WM had never been in trouble before and that he was excellent student in school. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the Middlesex County District Attorney’s Juvenile Diversion Program. Technically, WM’s case was not eligibile for what is called DA Diversion. Nevertheless, Attorney Lewin pressed the DA’s Office to allow WM into the Diversion Program. (The Diversion Program is extremely beneficial to an accused as it REMOVES THE CASE from the juvenile (criminal) justice system and ends up in the case being DISMISSED and NO CRIMINAL OR JUVENILE RECORD gets created.

On March 19, 2026, WM’s case was set for arraignment. WM and both of his parents along with Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell Juvenile Court. When the case was called Attorney Lewin explained to the Judge that he had been in extensive discussions with the DA’s Office about referring WM to the Juvenile Diversion Progtram. Attorney Lewin asked the Judge to postpone WM’s arraignment for one month to allow the Diversion Program to make a decision about accepting or rejecting WM’s case. (It is the taking place of the arraignment that creates an entry in the CORI [Criminal Offender Record Information] System; as long as the arraignment does not take place, no record gets created.) The Judge and the DA agreed to the continuance of the arraignment and the case was set down for April 23, 2026, for arraignment or possible diversion. WM and his parents and Attorney Lewin then met with the people from the Diversion Program and the DA’s Office agreed to take WM into the Diversion Program. (It is important to note that the charges against WM were NOT eligible for diversion; nevertheless Attorney Lewin was successful in getting the DA’s Office to agree to diversion. This was the direct result of thorough and persuasive advocacy by Attorney Kewin on WM’s behalf.)

Continue reading

by

On February 28, 2026, just before 7:00 PM, LB, a 69 year old woman from Haverhill, had a vodka and cranberry juice before leaving home. She drove to a bar/restaurant in Andover where she met her boyfriend. At the bar she had two large glasses of wine and topped it off with a big espresso martini. Her next good memory is waking up at Mass. General Hospital in Boston. She has no memory of being in an accident, of being brought to Lawrence General Hospital, or of being transferred to Mass. General in Boston. A witness who was travelling behind LB on Route 28 Northbound observed LB driving her car on Route 28 Northbound heading from Andover into Lawrence. The witness observed LB turn her car around and head South on the portion of Route 28 that is Northbound only. She was going the wrong way. The witness observed LB’s car crash into the jersey barriers on the side of Route 28 at the Route 495 Overpass construction site. The witness called 911 and the police and fire and EMT’s responded. At the hospital, a blood/alcohol test was done and LB’s reading was a .34 (almost dead). The police did a thorough investigation and LB was charged with OUI-Liquor and Negligent Operation.

LB consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin began his investigation. Attorney Lewin learned that the police investigation was completed on March 4, 2026 and that the police had issued their citation to LB on March 4, 2026. There is a law that requires the police to file their papers  (citation, police report, and application for crimimal complaint) at court no later than 6 business days following the completion of their investigation. This is a law, that sadly to say, most crimimal lawyers are NOT familiar with. Attorney Lewin knows this law inside and out.  Attorney Lewin knows the woman in the Clerk-Magistrate’s Office at Lawrence District Court who processes the police paperwork when it gets filed. On March 12, 2026, which was the sixth business day after March 4, 2026, Attorney Lewin learned that the police had NOT filed their paperwork at Court. Attorney Lewin sat back and waited. It was not until March 17, 2026 – 9 days after the citation was written – that the police finally filed their paperwork at court.

LB was arraigned in Lawrence District Court on May 6, 2026. Attorney Lewin had already prepared and filed a Motion To Dismiss the charges for violation of the 6 day rule. On May 27, 2026 there was a full evidentiary hearing on the Motion to Dismiss. Two police officers testified. The reason for the delay was that the officer who was responsible for filing the papers at court had been at the police academy for additional training. The Judge said he needed time to study the law and the case was continued to July 13, 2026. Attorney Lewin then filed a supplemental memorandum based on the testimony of the two police officers arguing that there was NO legal justification for the delay.

Continue reading

by

On May 29, 2026, JS, a Registered Nurse, went into the Target Store in Methuen and began picking up items and concealing them. The police report states: “Target staff stated that JS removed tags and placed $461.85 worth of items in a pink backpack which was a Target item with a removed tag as well as in her own personal bag.” Target staff brought JS to the loss prevention office and the police responded to the store. The police did a record check on JS and discovered that she had been previously prosecuted for shoplifting in Lowell District Court. The police told her that she would be summonsed to appear in Lawrence District Court for this new offense.

The police filed an Application for a Criminal Complaint against JS at Lawrence District Court for Shoplifting by Concealment. The Application was scheduled for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing on August 20, 2026.

JS contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained to JS that where she had been previously prosecuted for the same crime that it was going to be a reach to avoid prosecution in this new case – but, it was a reach that had to be vigorously pursued. Attorney Lewin obtained all the police reports and examined the papers from her previous case. Attorney Lewin spoke to the Methuen Police Prosecutor.

Continue reading

by

On June 8, 2026, SF, a 20 year old man from Lawrence, got pulled over by the State Police in Peabody. The inspection sticker on his newly purchased used car had expired. In Massachusetts you have 7 days from the day you register a car to get a new inspection sticker on the car and he was passed the 7th day. The Trooper gave him a citation for No Inspection Sticker. The big problem for SF is that he had a long list of motor vehicle violations on his record and he was at risk of losing his license and adding additional hundreds of dollars per month to his car insurance. On June 3, 2026, Attorney Lewin had represented SF in Woburn District Court and got NOT Responsible findings to charges of Speeding and No License in Possession at a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. (Charges of which he was absolutely guilty.)

After SF got the ticket on June 8, 2026, he immediately (the very next morning) got the car inspected and got a new inspection sticker. SF again retained Attorney Robert Lewin. Attorney Lewin had SF furnish Attorney Lewin with pictures of the new sticker on the car windshield. On August 20, 2026, SF and Attorney Lewin appeared in Peabody District Court for the Hearing before the Clerk-Magistrate on the ticket. The State Police were present and read the report to the Clerk-Magistrate. Attorney Lewin then explained that the very next day SF had got the car inspected and Attorney Lewin presented the pictures of the car with the new sticker on it. Attorney Lewin further explained that a responsible (guilty) finding would cost SF hundreds on his car insurance per month and could jeopardize his license. Attorney Lewin asked the Clerk to find SF NOT responsible. The Clerk-Magistrate turned to the State Trooper and the Trooper said he had no objection. The Clerk-Magistrate then announced that she was finding SF NOT Responsible.

Although this was a relatively simple case, Attorney Lewin fully prepared the case and had all the evidence that was needed to put the case in the win column. Attorney Lewin was an Assistant District Attorney from 1971 to 1975 and for the last 51 years has limited his practice to criminal defense. Results like this are common for Attorney Lewin as he fully and carefully prepares every case that he takes on. There are very few lawyers in Massachusetts who have the years of experience and breath of knowledge and “simple know how” that Attorney Lewin brings to every client and every case.

by

On March 22, 2022, Methuen Police Officer JK pulled a motor vehicle over for a marked lane violation. JK exited his cruiser. JK’s BWC (body worn camera) was on and recording. JK approached the stopped vehicle on the driver side. As JK arrived at the driver side window, the vehicle took off. The BWC captured an excellent image of the driver. JK ran back to his cruiser and gave chase but the vehicle got away. JK then proceded to do an investigation. He ran the license plate and saw that the plate came back to a NH woman. He then looked at her Facebook profile and saw a friend of the woman who was a dead ringer for the man driving the car. The Facebook profile even had the man’s name! JK then ran the man’s name through the RMV data base and a 58 year old man popped up and his RMV photo matched the BWC image that the officer had captured.  That man, GT, had been arrested 12 times for driving after suspension of his license. On his eleventh arrest he served six months in jail. On his 12th offense he served a year in jail (the maximum sentence). GT was no longer living at the address that the RMV had for him and never received a summons to appear in Court. The Court issued a warrant for his arrest and the warrant sat for four years.

GT stopped driving and he cleaned up his act between 2022 and 2026. GT met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover to handle this case. On March 6, 2026 GT and Attorney Lewin went into Lawrence District Court and got the warrant cancelled and GT was released without any conditions – other than he not drive unless duly licensed. The DA looked at GT’s prior record and said to Attorney Lewin “this is GT’s 13th offense, he’s looking at the max – a year in jail”. Attorney Lewin asked GT if he had ever taken any of his 12 prior cases to trial. GT said no that he had always pled guilty! Attorney Lewin told GT that this case was going to trial. The case was continued to April 27, 2026 and was ultimately set down for trial on July 21, 2026. Attorney Lewin began his investigation of the case and discovered that JK – the police officer – had been subject to a “POST Commission” Inquiry. This a commission that investigates police who break the law. To GT’s GREAT LUCK, JK was no longer a police officer and it was highly unlikely that he would appear to testify at the trial.

On July 22, 2026, GT and Attorney Lewin appeared in Courtroom 5 in Lawrence District Court. The case was called and Attorney Lewin answered that the Defense was “ready for trial”. JK, the officer, was not present and the DA answered that the Commonwealth was not ready for trial. The Judge looked at Attorney Lewin and Attorney Lewin said “The defense moves to dismiss the case.” The Judge then said “Case DISMISSED”.

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

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 – 2026, Lewin & Lewin
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design