Articles Posted in Clerk-Magistrate Hearings

On December 21, 2024, NP, a 35 year old female hospital operating room technician was caught shoplifting at the Target store in Lowell. She went through the self checkout without scanning an item. A loss prevention officer caught up to her and brought her back into the store. The Lowell Police were called to the store. The Target stores use facial recognition technology to identify shoplifters. Unfortunately for NP, this was the 15th time she had been observed (and recorded) shoplifting at Target in Lowell and Salem, NH. The police told NP she would receive papers to go to Lowell District Court.

NP consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. A Clerk-Magistrate hearing was set up for May 9, 2025. The purpose of the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing is for the Clerk-Magistrate to decide whether to issue a formal criminal complaint against the accused person. NP has no criminal record and a criminal record for shoplifting (which in reality is stealing) could cost her a job. If the Clerk-Magistrate issues a criminal complaint then the accused has to return to court for an arraignment in front of a Judge and a criminal record is created. If the Clerk-Magistrate can be persuaded not to issue a criminal complaint, then the accused is not charged and no criminal record is created. The Defense lawyer’s goal is to do his or her best to convince the Clerk-Magistrate not to issue the complaint.

Attorney Lewin went to work immediately. Attorney Lewin has established an excellent working relationship with Asset Loss Prevention team at Target and with the Police Prosecutors from Lowell. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the Asset Protection team at Target. Attorney Lewin also contacted the police prosecutor at the Lowell PD. Attorney Lewin was able to get the police and Target not to oppose Attorney Lewin’s request for a criminal complaint NOT to be issued against NP.

On March 20, 2025, JB, a 20 year old male, was driving his Mother’s car on I-95 in Boxford. He lost control of the car and the car went off the left side of the road striking the “cable retention system”, taking out six posts and damaging 72 feet of cable wire. JB panicked and continued driving the badly damaged car. He took the next exit off the highway, parked on the side of the road, and fled the scene. The car was found by the local police. They ran the plate and then went to JB’s house. JB and his mother were present. JB confessed to the police. The State Police issued a citation to JB for Leaving the Scene of a Property Damage Accident and a Marked Lane Violation. JB and his Mother contacted Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover and they retained Attorney Lewin.

Attorney Lewin then took the following actions:

  • Attorney immediately brought the citation over to Haverhill District Court and requested a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing.

PH is a 54 year old personal trainer. PH has her own workout studio but also travels to clients’ homes, particularly elderly or disabled clients. On November 15, 2024, PH was travelling from her studio in Rowley to the home of an elderly client in Amesbury. At an intersection in Amesbury she ran a red light and got pulled over by the Amesbury Police. When the police ran her license it came back that her license was suspended. The police cited PH for Operating After Suspension of License.  The police had her car towed and issued her a citation.

PH contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin instructed PH to immediately request a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing which PH did. It turns out that PH’s license was suspended because she had failed to pay a ticket. To her credit PH went and immediately paid the ticket and the reinstatement fee online and her license was reinstated. Attorney Lewin explained to PH that if anything helps to make these operating after suspension cases go away, it is getting your license reinstated before the hearing date.

Attorney Lewin contacted the Amesbury Police Prosecutor and explained that PH’s license had been suspended because of an unpaid ticket. Attorney Lewin further explained to the prosecutor that PH had immediately paid the ticket and the reinstatement fee and that her license was now reinstated. Attorney Lewin asked the prosecutor to agree to dismiss the charge.

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.

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.

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.

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.

On August 22, 2024, VM, a 43 year old Medical Practice Manager, co-hosted a high school graduation party for his niece. The party was held at a friend of VM’s house in Methuen. VM’s family and nine friends of VM’s niece were invited and attended. The friends of VM’s niece were all under age 21.  At the party there was hard liquor and beer available that had been put out by the home owner. The party got a bit loud, someone called the police, the police arrived, and saw the alcohol and charged both the homeowner and VM with furnishing alcohol to minors. The home owner had a clerk-magistrate hearing, represented himself, and the clerk-magistrate issued a criminal complaint against him for furnishing alcohol to a minor.

VM contacted and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin took a detailed statement of the facts from VM and from his niece and it became very apparent that VM had NOT furnished alcohol to anyone. Attorney lewin obtained the police report and there was nothing in the police report that indicated that VM had furnished alcohol to anyone. The police were relying on the fact that VM had co-hosted the party and was therefore responsible for making alcohol available to the minors.  Attorney Lewin contacted the Methuen Police prosecutor prior to the hearing and advocated that there was no evidence that VM had done anything wrong.

On September 12, 2024, VM, his niece, and Attorney Lewin went to Lawrence District Court for the hearing. The Clerk-Magistrate listened to the police presentation. Attorney Lewin then argued to the Clerk-Magistrate that there was NO evidence that VM had furnished alcohol to anyone. The Clerk-Magistrate agreed with Attorney Lewin and made a finding of NO probable cause and DENIED the police application for a criminal complaint.

On Friday, May 31, 2024, LO, a 25 year old prep-cook, was on her way to work and was running late. She came to an intersection in Haverhill and had a red light. She ran the light almost causing an accident – all in the view of a Mass. State Trooper who was sitting in his patrol car. The officer immediately put on his blue lights and pulled LO over. He gave her a citation for Negligent Operation (which carries a 60 day loss of license) and Failure to Stop for the Red Light.

LO contacted Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover and retained Attorney Lewin. Attorney Lewin instructed LO to immediately bring her citation to Haverhill District Court and request a hearing. LO did that and a hearing was set up for August 6, 2024. Attorney Lewin reached out to the State Police Prosecutor and advocated on LO’s behalf with the police prosecutor. On August 6, 2024, Attorney Lewin and LO appeared in Haverhill District Court. Although there was probable cause to issue the criminal complaint against LO for the Negligent Operation and the Failure to Stop charges, Attorney Lewin pointed out that LO had no criminal record and no driver record. Attorney Lewin advocated for the Clerk-Magistrate to NOT issue a criminal complaint against LO. Attorney Lewin had fully prepared LO to address the Clerk-Magistrate.

The police prosecutor told the Clerk-Magistrate that he had no objection to Attorney Lewin’s  request. The Clerk-Magistrate then continued the hearing for six months to February 4, 2025 and ordered that if LO was in no further trouble with the law then then entire matter would be dismissed on that date.

KM, a strikingly beautiful 22 year old single mom, made a poor choice of boyfriend.  She had an apartment in Methuen and he moved in with her. She became pregnant and then the boyfriend cheated on her. How did KM know? She found a video on the boyfriend’s cell phone of the boyfriend and the “other woman” having sex! In a moment of anger, KM broke the bathroom door in the apartment and put a whole in the wall. Yes, she has a temper. The boyfriend called the police. (You can’t make this stuff up.) The police came, investigated, and applied for a criminal complaint against KM for malicious destruction of property in Lawrence District Court. The application was set down for a Clerk-Magistrate hearing on January 30, 2024. KM consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.

Attorney Lewin contacted the Police prosecutor and explained the entire episode to the police prosecutor. KM had a family member who could do repair work and could fix the door and the wall.

On January 30, 2024, KM and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lawrence District Court for the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin explained the situation to the Clerk-Magistrate. Attorney Lewin proposed that the Clerk-Magistrate take no action on the application for criminal complaint and continue the hearing for 3 months to give KM an opportunity to fix the door and fix the hole in the wall. The Clerk-Magistrate (and the police prosecutor) agreed with Attorney Lewin’s suggestion and the hearing was continued to April 30, 2024. The Clerk-Magistrate said that if the repairs were completed before that date the no one had to come to court and the matter would be dismissed.

Contact Information