Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer BlogCB, a 40 year old plumber who needs a license to work, got in trouble in Lynn District Court back in 2009. He left Massachusetts and moved to FL and got a FL license. In 2015 he went to renew his FL license and was told he could not because his license/right to operate had been suspended in MA due to an outstanding warrant in Lynn District Court. In fact CB had a 2009 criminal case in Lynn that was in warrant status due to unpaid money. When CB called Lynn District Court he was told he would have to come up to MA to clear the warrant. On Monday, September 21, 2015 CB retained Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover. On Wednesday, September 23, 2015 Attorney Lewin went to Lynn District Court without CB and paid the moneys that were owing to the Court. The Court removed the default that had been entered against CB, cancelled the warrant, and ordered the case dismissed. The Registry of Motor Vehicles was notified, the suspension on CB’s license/right to operate was lifted, and CB is now able to renew his FL license.
INDECENT EXPOSURE CHARGE AVOIDED
On Thursday morning, July 2, 2015, PQ, a 64 year old man from Cambridge was out working in his garden completely naked. His next door neighbor a sixty-eight year old female was not amused. The police were called and responded. This was not the first time that PQ had done this – in fact it was the third time that had been reported. By the time the police had arrived PQ was in his house and had his clothes on. The female neighbor – who suffers from PTSD – told the police she was “shocked and alarmed” by his repetitive behavior. The police could have charged PQ with Open and Gross Lewdness and arrested him on the spot. Open and Gross Lewdness is a felony and upon two convictions sex offender registration is required. PQ got his first break that morning. The police did not arrest him; instead the police told him he would be receiving a notice from the Court. About one month later PQ received a Notice from the Cambridge District Court that the Cambridge Police had filed an application for a criminal complaint to issue against PQ for Indecent Exposure. The Notice informed PQ that a hearing would be held by a Clerk-Magistrate at the Court to determine whether or not PQ would be formally charged.That was PQ’s second break; the police were seeking a criminal complaint for Indecent Exposure, a misdemeanor that does not require sex offender registration as opposed to the felony charge of Open and Gross Lewdness. (Open and Gross Lewdness is an enhanced form of indecent exposure; it is Indecent Exposure that causes “shock and alarm”.) PQ retained Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover. Attorney Lewin told PQ he had to enroll immediately with a therapist/counselor/psychologist with expertise in exhibitionism. PQ followed Attorney Lewin’s suggestion and immediately began a program of psychological counseling. Attorney Lewin contacted the Cambridge Police Prosecutor who in turn put Attorney Lewin in contact with the Officer who would be prosecuting the case at the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin spoke at length with the prosecuting police officer and explained that PQ was now in psychological counseling. Attorney Lewin suggested to the prosecutor that the case be resolved at the level of the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing; specifically, Attorney Lewin advocated that a criminal complaint not be issued.
On September 15, 2015 PQ and Attorney Lewin appeared in Cambridge District Court for the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. PQ’s neighbor was there; the property manager for the complex where PQ and his neighbor live was present; and the prosecutor from Cambridge PD was present. The neighbor told her story to the Clerk-Magistrate; the property manager testified as to the prior complaints from other neighbors in the complex and as to how PQ had been spoken to by the property manager on prior occasions. Attorney Lewin informed the Clerk-Magistrate as to PQ’s good background and as to how he had immediately enrolled in counseling with a psychologist with expertise in dealing with sex offenders. Attorney Lewin presented a report from the psychologist. Attorney Lewin advocated for the Clerk-Magistrate not to issue the criminal complaint but rather to hold the application for one year and if PQ were in no further trouble then the application could be dismissed. The neighbor objected and wanted either a complaint to issue or the matter to be left open for two years. Ultimately the Clerk-Magistrate adopted Attorney Lewin’s proposal and continued the hearing for one year. The Clerk-Magistrate gave PQ a stern warning that if he exposes himself again that he will be arrested and charged with both this case and the new case.
This was a significant win for PQ. He was not charged with any criminal offense; no entry will be made on his criminal record; when the one year goes by – assuming he has been able to keep his clothes on – this application for a criminal complaint will be denied and dismissed and the papers are destroyed. PQ left the courthouse quite relieved.
FOUR FELONIES DISMISSED IN LOWELL DISTRICT COURT
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.
3 TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS IN LOWELL – NOT RESPONSIBLE
On April 23, 2014, BN, a 20 year old male from Tewksbury, was driving on his way to work. He was on Livingston Street in Tewksbury. A car was parked on the right side of the road with its hazard lights on. That car was half way in the travel lane and half way over the fog line. BN approached the stopped vehicle, slowed, put his left directional signal on, proceeded over the center line of the road, passed the stopped vehicle, and then went back into his lane of travel. An unmarked car pulled up behind BN and began to blink its lights. The unmarked car got right on BN’s tail. BN continued on. The unmarked car then pulled alongside BN and the operator held up a police badge. BN pulled over. An off-duty Tewksbury Police Officer came out of the unmarked car and approached BN. The off-duty police officer called for a cruiser and an on-duty police officer responded to the scene. BN was ordered out of his car; he was patted down by the police; the police searched his car. The police found nothing. The police then gave BN a citation for speeding and two marked lane violations.
BN requested a hearing and mailed in the citation. BN went to the first hearing before the Clerk-Magistrate without a lawyer and lost. BN appealed.
BN retained Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover for the appeal hearing in front of the Judge. BN met with Attorney Lewin and fully prepared for the hearing. BN and Attorney Lewin went over the facts of the case in great detail. Attorney Lewin thoroughly prepared BN to testify. Attorney Lewin had BN practice his testimony as if they were in Court.
TWO SHOPLIFTING CHARGES AVOIDED
On March 12, 2015 FD stole from a store in Lynnfield. The reader is directed to the posting below dated April 29, 2015. Attorney Lewin represented FD at her Clerk-Magistrate’s Hearing in Peabody District Court in that case and got the Clerk-Magistrate to continue the hearing for six months with no complaint to issue as long as FD stayed out of trouble. Unfortunately for FD on June 26, 2015 she went into the Shoe Market in Lynnfield and got caught stealing a $126.00 pair of shoes. FD received notices from the Peabody District Court that on July 22, 2015 a hearing would be held in Peabody District Court (1) to decide if a criminal complaint for the new shoplifting case would be issued against her and (2) to decide what action would be taken on the old, still open, case. FD once again retained Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover. FD was at risk of having two criminal complaints for either shoplifting or larceny being issued against her. Attorney Lewin and FD and FD’s husband put together a strategy and plan of action to try to maximize the chances of not having criminal complaints be issued. FD enrolled in a Shoplifting Prevention Program; FD – who clearly is having psychological problems – enrolled in a treatment program with a licensed psychologist; FD’s husband went to the Shoe Market and apologized to the owner of the store and paid the store owner the $126.00 for the pair of shoes FD had stolen.
On July 22, 2015 FD, her husband, and Attorney Robert Lewin appeared in Peabody District Court for the hearing. Attorney Lewin presented the Clerk-Magistrate with a report from the psychologist and with proof that FD was enrolled in the Shoplifting Prevention Program. Attorney Lewin made an impassioned argument to the Clerk-Magistrate not to issue criminal complaints against FD. The Clerk-Magistrate agreed and continued the hearing for one year. If FD can stay out of trouble then on July 22, 2016 both applications for criminal complaint against FD will be dismissed and she does not have to return o court.
As a result of this disposition it is important to note the following:
DRUG CHARGES DISMISSED
On November 20, 2014, ET, a 21 year old male, was being watched by the Lawrence Police. Following a drug transaction in ET’s car he got pulled over for speeding. Following the stop the police seized cocaine and percocette pills from ET. The police arrested ET and the next day he appeared in Court for an arraignment. ET’s case was continued for a pre-trial hearing to January 22, 2015. ET was/is a drug dependent person and was/is in need of drug treatment.
ET and his parents visited Attorney Robert Lewin in North Andover and retained Attorney Lewin to represent ET in this case. ET’s parents got ET into treatment immediately. Prior to the pre-trial hearing Attorney Lewin went over to the DA’s Office at Lawrence District Court and met with the Assistant District Attorney assigned to the case. Attorney Lewin was able to negotiate a general continuance of the case with a dismissal. On January 22, 2015, Attorney Lewin and ET appeared in Lawrence District Court. Attorney Lewin explained that ET was drug dependent, but that he was getting extensive treatment and therapy. Attorney Lewin advocated for the case to be continued generally and dismissed. The Judge adopted Attorney Lewin’s request and continued the case generally to April 29, 2015. When a case is continued generally there is no admission of guilt or wrongdoing. There is NO guilty plea; there is NO admission to sufficient facts. It is NOT a plea bargain. Between January 22 and April 29, 2015 ET remained in out-patient counseling and ET furnished Attorney Lewin with reports from his drug counselor and with signed attendance sheets from NA meetings.
On April 29, 2015 ET and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lawrence District Court. Attorney Lewin furnished the DA and the Judge with copies of the reports from the drug counselor and with the NA Attendance sheets. The Judge expressed her approval of ET’s efforts and ordered all the charges against ET dismissed. Because these drug charges were dismissed ET is eligible to have his record sealed immediately. ET left the court house a very happy client.
ANOTHER SHOPLIFTING CASE AVOIDED
On March 12, 2015 FD, a 54 year old woman from Middleton went shopping at Whole Foods in Lynnfield. Instead of using a shopping cart FD used her pockets and pocket book. She filled up her pockets with packages of food and headed out the door. Unfortunately for FD she was being watched by a loss prevention officer (LPO). The LPO stopped FD just after she went out the door of the store. She was brought back to the security office and the Lynnfield Police were called in. The merchandise ($124.00 worth of food) was fully recovered. The store gave FD a No Trespass Order and the police told her she would be summonsed to court. FD retained Attorney Robert Lewin.
Attorney Lewin reached out to the Lynnfield Police and quickly negotiated a resolution of the case that would NOT involve FD being charged with any criminal offense. The case was set up for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing at Peabody District Court. On April 29, 2015 FD and Attorney Lewin appeared at Peabody District Court for the hearing before the Clerk-Magistrate. The Clerk-Magistrate adopted Attorney Lewin’s request that a complaint NOT be issued against FD; the Clerk-Magistrate continued the hearing for four months and ordered that as long as FD stayed out of trouble then on the four month date she would not have to come to the court and the application for criminal complaint against her would be dismissed.
As a result of this disposition it is important to note the following:
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE CHARGE – NOT GUILTY – WOBURN DISTRICT COURT
DT, a 68 year old woman from North Reading was charged in Woburn District Court by the North Reading Police with obstruction of justice. The case arose from the following facts. A man in his mid thirties was found in the parking lot of an apartment complex in North Reading obviously suffering from a drug overdose. He was foaming at the mouth and had to be rushed to a local hospital for treatment. The police discovered the man’s cell phone in the parking lot and seized it and took it to the station to search for clues as to what drugs he was on and where he had obtained the drugs. Within one hour DT, who lives in the same apartment complex with her son who is heroin dependent, called the police station saying that she had lost her phone in the parking lot and was wondering if anyone had turned in a cell phone. DT’s son was known to the police as a drug user and the police felt that DT’s mother was trying to get the phone the police had seized to prevent the police from finding evidence in the phone against her son. DT went to the police station and said she was there to pick up her phone. The police asked her whose phone she was looking for and she then said the phone belonged to her son but she had referred to it as her phone because she paid for it. The police asked her for the phone number and she gave it to the police. The police dialed the number and it went to DT’s son’s voice mail. The police accused her of lying and misleading them. The police charged her with Obstruction of Justice. DT hired Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover. Attorney Lewin met with DT and her son and got a detailed timeline of exactly what happened.
In fact DT’s son had lost his phone the day before. DT’s call to the police (which was recorded) where she inquired about “her” phone being lost was a legitimate call. There was no evidence that she or her son knew anything about the man with the drug overdose in the parking lot. Working with DT and her son, Attorney Lewin interviewed an independent civilian witness who was prepared to testify that DT’s son had lost his phone the day before. The Government’s case was a terrible case and Attorney Lewin went to the DA and asked the DA to dismiss the case. The North Reading Police had it in for DT because her son was a drug addict. They refused to dismiss the case. The case was set down for trial. On April 14, 2015 DT, her son, the independent witness, and Attorney Lewin appeared in Court and answered ready for trial. The DA came to Attorney Lewin and offered “pre-trial probation”; Attorney Lewin refused and said to the DA the case for her innocence is overwhelming. The case proceeded to trial. Three police officers testified. Attorney Lewin’s cross examination of the police was sharp and went to the heart of the case – that DT had absolutely no intention of misleading the police. At the close of the Commonwealth’s case it was obvious that DT was innocent. Attorney Lewin rested without calling a witness. The Judge (this was a jury-waived trial) immediately found DT NOT guilty. DT had been terrified about going to trial; she did not want to go to trial and even considered pleading guilty just to avoid a trial. Attorney Lewin told her not to plead guilty to something she did not do. DT, her son, and Attorney Lewin left the court together; DT felt like she had been given her life back.
MINOR IN POSSESSION CASE DIVERTED
On February 17, 2015, DR, an 18 year old senior at a local high school was in the back seat of a car with several friends. The boys were drinking. The car was parked in an area that was closed and the police approached the car and observed DR kicking what appeared to be a bottle of whiskey under the front seat. DR was ordered out of the car, admitted to the police the bottle was his, and was charged with being a minor in possession of alcohol. He was not arrested; the police applied for a criminal complaint against DR and a hearing before a Clerk-Magistrate at Lawrence District Court was scheduled. DR had been accepted to a number of colleges and was still waiting to hear from other schools and was concerned that this case would get onto his criminal record and could affect his ability to go to college. DR’s parents retained Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the police prosecutor from North Andover and explained the situation to him and advocated for the case to be diverted out of the criminal court system and to be sent to the “juvenile” diversion program. Even though DR was not a juvenile, the Essex County Juvenile Diversion Program will accept young adults in certain cases. Attorney Lewin also spoke directly with the people from the Diversion Program and they agreed that DR was an appropriate candidate for the diversion program.On March 26, 2015 DR, his mother and father, and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lawrence District Court for the Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. Attorney Lewin made a full presentation to the Clerk-Magistrate of all the good qualities and accomplishments in DR’s background and why he merited this opportunity to keep his record clean. The Police and the Clerk-Magistrate agreed and the Clerk-Magistrate diverted DR’s case out of the criminal court system and referred DR to the Diversion Program. As a result of this disposition NO criminal complaint was issued against DR and NO criminal record was created. It is as if the incident did not happen. DR and his parents left the Court very relieved.
DOMESTIC ASSAULT & BATTERY (STRANGULATION) DISMISSED IN LAWRENCE DISTRICT COURT
On Sunday, January 25, 2015, TD, a 38 year old male mental health counselor, was arrested by the Methuen Police and charged with two counts of Assault & Battery on his wife. One of the counts alleged that TD had strangled his wife. On Monday, January 26, 2015 TD was brought to Lawrence District Court and was ordered detained (held without bail). A full detention hearing was scheduled for Friday, January 30, 2015. TD’s family contacted Attorney Robert Lewin from North Andover. Attorney Lewin obtained the papers in TD’s case from the Court and then went to the jail in Middleton to meet with TD. TD’s family retained Attorney Lewin and Attorney Lewin prepared a presentation for the Judge for the detention hearing. Attorney Lewin also met with the Assistant District Attorney assigned to the case.
Ever since the Jared Remy case (he killed his girlfriend while out on release in a domestic abuse case) the Courts have gotten much stricter in these cases. Pre-trial detention used to be very rare in these cases, now it is commonplace.
On January 30, 2015 TD was brought to court and a detention hearing was held. An agreement was reached between Attorney Lewin and the DA’s Office that TD could be released but that until the case was finished he could not go home and had to wear a GPS device. TD was released and went to live with a friend in Haverhill. The case was continued to February 13, 2015. On that date Attorney Lewin petitioned the Court to allow TD to go back home and to remove the GPS device. After a full contested hearing the Judge granted Attorney Lewin’s request and ordered that TD could go back home and that the GPS device could be removed. The case was set down for jury trial on March 30, 2015. Attorney Lewin met with TD’s wife and she signed a marital affidavit stating that she would not testify against her husband. On March 30, 2015 TD and his wife and Attorney Lewin appeared in Lawrence District Court. The case was called for trial. Attorney Lewin answered that the Defense was ready for trial. Attorney Lewin told the Judge that TD”s wife was present in court and wished to exercise her marital privilege. The Judge had a discussion with TD’s wife and the Judge accepted her exercise of her marital privilege. The DA said the state could not go forward. Attorney Lewin then moved that the case be dismissed. The judge then ordered the case dismissed. This was significant for TD as a conviction or an admission of guilt of any type that he had strangled his wife would have cost him his job and potentially would have landed him in jail. TD (and his wife) left the Court arm in arm and happy that this ordeal was behind them.