Malicious Destruction of Property

January 25, 2026

Juvenile Deliquency Complaint Withdrawn – A Complete WIN

On December 5, 2025, MO – a 14 year old boy – and two friends were at the Square One Mall in Saugus. The three boys got the brilliant idea that it would be fun to drop water balloons from the second floor of the parking garage onto cars entering the garage. One of the cars that got hit was a Porsche. The driver, who was not the owner, claimed that the balloon caused a crack in the windshield. The driver entered the garage and collared one of the three boys – the other two took off. The police and mall security responded to the garage and ultimately, the boy who got caught gave up the names of the other two boys (one of whom was MO). The police filed an application for a criminal/juvenile delinquency complaint against each of the three boys for malicious destruction to property in Lynn Juvenile Court and a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing was set up for January 22, 2026 at that court.

MO’s parents sought out and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover to represent MO. Attorney Lewin found it hard to believe that a water balloon could crack a windshield. Attorney Lewin investigated and made direct contact with the owner of the Porsche. The owner did not confirm that there was any damage to the windshield. Attorney Lewin then made direct contact with the police prosecutor and pointed out that the crime of malicious destruction of property requires that there be some destruction or damage and in this case the owner of the Porsche would not confirm that there was damage. In addition, the crime of malicious destruction to property requires that the damage be done with malice – which means that the act was done out of anger, hostility, or revenge. The three boys had acted out of stupidity – but not out of any sense of anger, hostility, or revenge. Attorney Lewin and the police prosecutor had several conversations about the case and Attorney Lewin advocated for the case to be dismissed.

Two days before the scheduled hearing Attorney Lewin received an email from the Clerk-Magistrate of the Lynn Juvenile Court informing him that the police had withdrawn the application for a criminmal/juvenile delinquency complaint against MO. Attorney Lewin explained the following to MO and his parents:

January 29, 2025

Road Rage Charge To Be Dismissed

by Robert D. Lewin

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.

June 9, 2024

DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY CHARGE AVOIDED

by Robert D. Lewin

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.

April 20, 2019

ROAD RAGE CHARGE AVOIDED

by Robert D. Lewin

On December 30, 2018, MQ, a 51 year old woman from Billerica, drove to the Burlington Mall. She entered the parking lot and searched for a space. She spotted a space in an aisle and headed toward the space. As she approached the space a woman (whom we shall call W) driving an SUV coming from the opposite direction pulled into the space directly passing by the front of MQ’s car. According to a Burlington Police Department Report, W told police that MQ stopped her vehicle and began screaming at W “F–k you, I was waiting for that space.” According to the police report W said that MQ continued screaming. As W (and her teenage daughter) began to walk toward the mall entrance W wrote down the plate number of MQ’s vehicle. W also noticed MQ walking around W’s car. W entered the mall and did her shopping. When she came back out and went to her car there was a long scratch that went around the car (the whole passenger side, the front hood, and the whole driver side). W immediately called the police. The Burlington Police responded. From the license plate they learned that the owner of the car was MQ and they called MQ. According to the police report MQ denied scratching the car, but then began “yelling into the phone “I was walking around the car because I was thinking about keying it but I never did.”

The police filed an application for criminal complaint against MQ for malicious damage to a motor vehicle. A conviction of this offense carries a one year loss of your driver license.

MQ sought out an attorney. She met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover. Attorney Lewin explained the law in detail to MQ and cautioned her that a conviction would carry a one-year loss of her driver’s license. MQ lived in Billerica and worked in Cambridge and absolutely needed a license to get back and forth to work.

September 15, 2015

FOUR FELONIES DISMISSED IN LOWELL DISTRICT COURT

by Robert D. Lewin

On May 1, 2015, SC, a 19 year old fellow from Dracut with no criminal record, got very high smoking a controlled substance with several neighbors. At 1:00 AM he went to a convenient store in Dracut; the store was closed. SC had a barbell with him and proceeded to break a plate glass window and the window frame attempting to gain entrance to the store. A silent alarm was tripped and the police responded. A neighbor also had seen what had gone on and the store security system video had captured images of SC breaking the window and the frame. The police arrived and observed SC’s condition; it was clear he was under the influence of something. SC called his Mother who also responded to the scene. The police allowed SC to go in the custody of his Mother but told him he would be summonsed into court. Eight weeks later SC received a summons to appear in Lowell District Court to answer to a criminal complaint charging SC with two counts of malicious destruction to property over $250, attempted breaking and entering, and possession of burglars tools (all felonies). SC and his mother came to see Attorney Robert Lewin in North Andover and retained Attorney Lewin. SC had no criminal record and having four felony charges on his record could create great problems for SC in terms of getting employment or going to college. Firstly, Attorney Lewin explained to SC that if anything helps make this type of case go away it is paying for the damage done to the store and apologizing to the store owner. SC’s Mother and Grandfather went to the storekeeper and had a heart to heart talk with the storekeeper. The storekeeper had spent $1,062 replacing the large plate glass and fixing the window frame. SC’s grandfather wrote out a check to the storekeeper for the full amount. The storekeeper was very appreciative and wrote out a receipt. On the receipt he specifically requested that all the charges against SC be dropped. Attorney Lewin called the Police Prosecutor from Dracut and explained the situation. Attorney Lewin then went over to Lowell District Court and met face to face with the Police Prosecutor from Dracut. Attorney Lewin asked the police to agree to dismiss the criminal charges prior to arraignment. The significance of the criminal charges being dismissed prior to arraignment is that the charges DO NOT GO ON THE ACCUSED PERSON’S RECORD. A criminal record gets created once an accused person is arraigned in court. The police prosecutor was agreeable. Now it was necessary to get the District Attorney’s Office to agree. Attorney Lewin made a call to the Supervisor of the District Attorney’s Office at Lowell District Court. Attorney Lewin explained the entire case and that the police were agreeable to the charges being dismissed prior to arraignment. Attorney Lewin put the Assistant District Attorney in touch with the police prosecutor and the Assistant District Attorney then agreed to the charges being dismissed prior to arraignment.
On September 15, 2015 SC and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lowell District Court. SC’s case was called in the First Criminal Session and Attorney Lewin informed the Judge that the Commonwealth and the Defense had agreed that all the charges were to be dismissed without SC being arraigned (prior to arraignment). The Judge ordered the charges all dismissed prior to arraignment.
As a result of this disposition SC has NO CRIMINAL RECORD. If a CORI check is done on SC this case will not show up. It is as if it did not happen. SC and his Mother left the Courthouse very very happy with the result.

May 21, 2013

Malicious Destruction of Property Charge Dismissed

by Robert D. Lewin

On March 17, 2013 YH, a 23 year old foreign student in his Senior Year at Boston College, let his temper get the best of him. YH was looking for a parking space on Boylston Street in downtown Boston. A lady was preparing to back into a space when YH quickly pulled into the space. The lady got out of her car and asked YH to get out of the space. He did and drove around the block and found another parking space. YH got out of his car and then proceeded to walk back up Boylston Street. YH saw the lady’s car parked in the space. As YH walked by the car he took his keys and scratched the side of the lady’s car. He did not see that the lady was sitting inside the car. She immediately got out of the car and called 911. The police responded and took statements from both YH and the lady. Subsequently, YH received a Notice from the Boston Municipal Court that an application for a criminal complaint had been filed against YH by the Boston Police for Malicious Destruction to Property Over $250.00. This charge is a felony. If a criminal complaint issued against YH for the charge he could be deported. YH contacted the Office of Lewin & Lewin and met with Attorney Robert Lewin. Attorney Lewin explained to YH the importance of YH having a lawyer speak with the Boston Police prior to the hearing to see if a result could be negotiated that would avoid a criminal complaint from being issued against YH.

YH retained Attorney Robert Lewin. Within one hour of being retained Attorney Lewin called the Boston PD. The Officer in charge of the case worked the 4-11 shift and was due in at 4 the next day. At 4 PM the next day Attorney Lewin spoke with the officer in charge of the case. They worked out an agreement that if YH paid for the damage done to the car ($712.00) then the police would agree to recommend that the Clerk not issue a criminal complaint against YH. On Monday, May 20, 2013 YH and Attorney Robert Lewin appeared in the Boston Municipal Court in the Criminal Clerk’s Office. Attorney Lewin reported to the Clerk the agreement that had been reached between the police and the Defense. The Clerk felt the agreement was fair. The hearing was continued for 2 months for YH to pay the restitution of $712.00. Upon payment for the $712.00 in restitution the Application for Criminal Complaint will be dismissed and NO criminal complaint will be issued against YH.

As a result of this disposition YH was NOT charged; NO entry was made on his criminal record and this case will not impact his immigration status. This may sound like a simple case; the key to a successful resolution was contacting the police and working the case out with the police prior to the hearing. After practicing criminal law for 42 years (on both sides of the fence) Attorney Lewin knows what the police want to hear – and more importantly, what the do not want to hear.

March 3, 2012

“Not Guilty” Verdict in BMC of Malicious Destruction of Property

by Robert D. Lewin

JA went out in Boston on a “party bus” with a large group of friends on a Friday night. There was a lot of drinking on the bus and the party made its way to a club in downtown Boston. JA was drinking heavily and ‘blacked out’ at about midnight. He woke up in a jail cell at the Boston Police station the next morning. He had no idea what happened or why he had been arrested. The last thing he recalled was being at the night club. He was informed that he was being charged with malicious destruction of property in excess of $250 (a felony). In the Boston Municipal Court (BMC) on Monday morning, JA heard the Assistant District Attorney read the facts of the case from a police report: a citizen in the South End of Boston had called 911 at about 4:00 a.m. to report a young man yelling, screaming and kicking in the front door of a brownstone apartment building next door. The police responded to the scene and found the front door of the apartment building bashed in and broken. JA was lying asleep on the floor just inside the door, with broken wood from the door strewn about around him. The police officers woke up JA and arrested him. JA appeared to the officers to be heavily intoxicated. After his arraignment, JA hired Lewin & Lewin to defend his case. The Assistant District Attorney offered JA probation if he would plead guilty but JA wanted his day in Court. Attorney Joshua Lewin prepared the case in great detail and represented JA at his trial. Attorney Lewin knew that the government would have a difficult time proving that JA acted “maliciously”–a difficult standard under the law. The police officer and the property manager testified for the government at trial and were cross-examined vigorously by Attorney Lewin. When the government rested its case, Attorney Lewin presented a memorandum of law and argued to the Judge that the government had failed to prove that JA acted “maliciously” and that the Judge was required under the law to find him “not guilty.” The Judge read the memorandum, listened to Attorney Lewin’s arguments, and immediately rendered a verdict of “not guilty.” The Assistant District Attorney and the police officer were stunned. JA was ecstatic and could not believe it–he had just won a seemingly unwinnable case. Attorney Lewin knew that the case was won because of his diligent preparation and sound strategy. The lawyers at Lewin & Lewin dig deep into every case and look for every possible way to win every case. JA was the beneficiary of Attorney Lewin’s thorough preparation for trial.