Massachusetts Criminal Lawyer Blog

January 20, 2022

Warrant Cancelled – Charges Dismissed – In Less Than Two Hours

In May of 2021, AM, a 41 year old cleaner, got pulled over by the Methuen Police and was cited for Operating After Suspension, Operating an Uninsured and Unregistered Motor Vehicle, Wrongfully Attaching Plates, and Failing to Stop. AM changed addresses and never received the summons to go to Lawrence District Court and a warrant was issued for his arrest. AM forgot about the case and when he went to renew his license he was told he had a warrant in Lawrence District Court. AM became concerned that he would get picked up on the warrant and held. He sought out an attorney. AM spoke with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover.

AM wanted to go into court immediately to get the warrant cleared. On January 20, 2022 AM and Attorney Lewin went into Lawrence District Court at 8:30 AM. Attorney Lewin went into the Clerk-Magistrate’s Office and had the case put on the Court List for hearing that day. Attorney Lewin brought AM into the probation office where probation did an intake interview. Attorney Lewin then spoke with the Assistant District Attorney in charge of the Lawrence office. After speaking the with Assistant DA, an agreement was reached where all the charges would be dismissed on the payment of $300.00 in court costs.

Shortly before 10:00 AM the case was called. The Judge ordered the outstanding warrant cancelled. The Judge asked Attorney Lewin and the Assistant DA if the case could be resolved. Attorney Lewin told the Judge the parties had reached an agreement for the criminal charges to be dismissed upon the payment of $300 in Court Costs. The Judge adopted the agreement. So, less than 2 hours after AM and Attorney Lewin entered the courthouse the warrant was gone and the cases were dismissed.

January 17, 2022

Warrant Cleared – Case Dismissed – 2 Hours

by Robert D. Lewin

On October 6, 2020, JG, a 25 year old man from Brazil, was stopped by the Danvers Police and issued a citation for Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle. Her ignored the citation. He and his wife left the country and when they tried to return they were stopped at the Canadian Border and were denied entry back into the US. The reason: he had a warrant in Salem District Court for that unlicensed operation. JG called Salem District Court and was told he had to come back or he had to get a lawyer and see if the lawyer could resolve the case for him. JG spoke with Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. On On Friday, December 31. 2021 JG paid Attorney Lewin’s legal fee by wire transfer from Canada. On the next business day, Monday, January 3, 2022 Attorney Lewin went over to Salem District Court to obtain all the court papers and speak with the DA’s Office. After reviewing the Court papers and the police report Attorney Lewin felt this was a case that could be settled immediately. Attorney Lewin requested that the case be sent into the Courtroom and the Clerk-Magistrate agreed and sent the case in to be heard by the Judge. Attorney Lewin spoke with the District Attorney who agreed to dismiss the case.

The case was called and Attorney Lewin explained to the Judge that his client was in Canada and could not get back into the US because of the warrant. Attorney Lewin explained to the Judge that the DA had agreed to dismiss the case. Attorney L:ewin requested that the dismissal be entered prior to arraignment. The Judge agreed and within two hours of Attorney Lewin’s arrival at the Court the case was called, the warrant was cancelled, and the case was dismissed prior to arraignment and JG never left his apartment in Canada!

When a case is dismissed prior to arraignment no criminal record is created and no entry is made in the statewide criminal offender record information (CORI) system. Needless to say JG was a happy client.

December 28, 2021

Three Counts of Assault & Battery Dismissed

by Robert D. Lewin

MU is a 27 year old female who was living with her mother (age 62) and brother (age 25) in the family home in Andover. On February 28, 2021 the police were called to the house on the report of assaults by MU on both her mother and brother. The brother told the police that MU threw a full glass of water at him and attempted to kick him. According to the police report the Mother told the police that MU had been drinking and that MU “began kicking at her (the mother) and pulling her hair, pulling clumps of hair out of her head.” The mother also told the police that MU kicked at the Mother and the brother and also had bitten them. The policed observed the clumps of hair that had been pulled out and observed bruises and bite marks on the brother and mother. The policed arrested MU and she was charged with Assault & Battery on a person over age 60 (a felony) and two additional counts of Assault & Battery.

MU consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. MU’s version of the events was very different from the version of events given to the police by her mother and brother. It was clear to Attorney Lewin that MU had been the victim of an attack by her brother and mother. An application for a criminal complaint against the mother for assaulting MU was filed at Lawrence District Court. This “leveled the playing field”.

Attorney Lewin explained to MU that the only people who really win in criminal court are the lawyers because they are paid to be there and that it is in everyone else’s best interest to get out of criminal court as quickly and favorably as possible. Attorney Lewin explained to MU that everyone involved in this situation (MU, her mother, and her brother) had a right to remain silent and a right NOT to testify against each other. Attorney Lewin further explained that if everyone exercised their right to remain silent all the charges (against both MU and her mother) would have to be dismissed. MU said that worked for her as she had no interest in testifying against her mother and she wanted the charges against herself dismissed. Even though the brother had not been charged, he too had a right to refuse to testify against his sister as his testimony could tend to incriminate him in a crime (assault & battery on his sister). With all that in mind Attorney Lewin contacted the lawyer for the Mother and suggested that it was in MU’s best interest and the Mother’s best interest not to testify against one another. The Mother’s lawyer agreed.

December 27, 2021

Assault & Battery Charge On A Child Avoided At Clerk-Magistrate Hearing

by Robert D. Lewin

On November 5, 2020, LT, a 43 year old firefighter in a town north of Boston, was at home with his wife and two sons, ages 5 and 6. The five year old son has behavioral issues and throws tantrums when he does not get his way. The family had supper together and the LT’s wife was getting the two boys ready for bed. The five year old began demanding to eat more. His mother told him no and he had a meltdown. Her was kicking and screaming. LT then got off the couch and went over to the five year old. LT told this son to stop screaming and LT started to count 10, 9, 8 … The boy then stood up, stuck his face out toward LT, and screamed at LT. LT had his right hand extended and swept three fingers across his sons cheek striking the boy’s neckline and chin line. LT then picked his son up and carried him into his bedroom and placed him down on the bed. The sweep across the chin/neck area had left very visible and distinct red marks on the five year old’s neck.

The next morning, with the red marks very visible, the five year old went to school. A teacher noticed the marks and asked the five year old what happened and he told the teacher that his father had hit him the night before. The teacher – being a mandated reporter- immediately called DCF and the police. DCF and the police went to LT’s home to investigate and they confirmed that what the boy told them was true.

The police contacted LT and asked him to come to the station. LT was interviewed at the station by the police and DCF and he admitted to striking his son. DCF opened an abuse case against LT and the police filed an application for a criminal complaint against LT at Lowell District Court. DCF told LT and his wife that LT could not be left alone with the boys or DCF would go to court to seek custody of the boys.

December 24, 2021

Assault & Battery & Disturbing the Peace Charges Against a Veteran Avoided At Clerk-Magistrate Hearing

by Robert D. Lewin

SS, a 40 year old Gulf War Veteran from NY State, came to Methuen for the funeral of a fellow veteran. SS and several other veterans arrived in Methuen on Friday, July 16, 2021. They all checked into a hotel and went out for dinner and some drinks. At 3:00 AM on Saturday, July 17, 2021 the police were dispatched to the parking lot of the hotel on the report of a man with a knife acting belligerently. The police arrived and saw SS attempting to fight one of his fellow veterans. The police attempted to deescalate the situation but SS did not respond to any of their requests. Ultimately the police were forced to taze SS and he fell to the ground.

The police spoke to SS’s fellow veterans who informed the police that SS suffered from PTSD. Rather than arrest SS, the police brought SS to Holy Family Hospital in Methuen. The police filed an application for a criminal complaint against SS for Assault & Battery and Disturbing the Peace at Lawrence District Court. The Application was set down for a hearing on Friday, October 1, 2021.

SS consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately obtained a copy of SS’s DD-214 (Discharge Summary) and a copy of SS’s VA Determination of Disability. It was clear to Attorney Lewin that this episode was a direct result of SS’s PTSD. In addition, Attorney Lewin got confirmation that SS was in treatment at the VA. Attorney Lewin spoke with the police prosecutor and furnished the police prosecutor with copies of the documents that Attorney Lewin had obtained.

December 21, 2021

Open and Gross Lewdness Charge Dismissed

by Robert D. Lewin

In August 0f 2020, LC, a 61 year old self-employed contractor, received a summons to appear in Newburyport District Court to answer to a criminal complaint charging him with open and gross lewdness and indecent exposure. The complaint alleged that the offenses occurred on July 25, 2020. LC retained a lawyer and LC was arraigned on August 31, 2020. The case dragged on in court for a year and nothing seemed to be happening with the case. LC then consulted with Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin saw that there were two big areas where the Defense could strike and potentially win the case – and win it quickly.

The police report indicated that a woman was driving south on I-95 from Maine through NH into Massachusetts. The woman told the state police that a man in a truck had been following her vehicle closely and at times would pull alongside her vehicle. She told the state police that the man was throwing her kisses. She then told the police that after she and the man crossed from NH into MA the man pulled alongside of her and was naked. She said he then raised his body and exposed his genitals to her and was masturbating. She said the man then pulled off I-95 into the Salisbury rest area. She got the license plate number of the vehicle and furnished it to the state police. The license plate came back to LC’s vehicle. The police were unable to make contact with LC, but charged him nevertheless.

Attorney Lewin explained to LC that nowhere in the police report does it state that the woman ever made an identification of LC as the person in the vehicle. Attorney Lewin pointed out to LC that the state had the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it was LC who exposed himself. It was NOT enough that it was LC’s vehicle. At a trial the state would have to prove that it was LC who was driving the vehicle and it was LC who exposed himself. There was another big issue. The woman said that the man pulled off at the Salisbury rest area. Attorney Lewin got out the maps of I-95 and showed that the exit ramp for the Salisbury rest area off I-95 South begins in NH, not in MA. The woman had told the state police that the masturbation and the exposure occurred before the man pulled off the highway. This means that NO crime was committed in MA.

December 19, 2021

Shoplifting Charge (Fourth Offense) Avoided

by Robert D. Lewin

On October 2, 2021, NS, a 38 year old alien (green card holder) from India was caught shoplifting in Macy’s in Saugus. Macy’s had her on video and actually had her on video on three prior occasions shoplifting in the store. The loss prevention officer escorted NS back to the security office and the Saugus Police were called. The Saugus Police took her information and did not arrest her; they told her she would receive a notice from the Lynn District Court.

NS and her husband began a search for a lawyer. NS and her husband consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained how lucky NS was that the police did not arrest her. They could have and then she would have been fingerprinted and she would have to appear before a Judge and a criminal record would have been created. Attorney Lewin immediately contacted the Saugus Police Prosecutor to request that the case be set up for a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing. This was done.

Attorney Lewin recognized that NS had a serious problem. NS completely lacked the ability to see the situation she was in. NS kept saying it was an accident and a mistake. Attorney Lewin pointed out that stealing merchandise four times from the same store was not an accident or mistake. On four different occasions NS had gone into the store with the intention to steal; she had picked up merchandise, placed it into a bag, then hidden the merchandise under other items in the bag, and then walked out of the store without paying. Those were all intentional acts that required planning and execution. Attorney Lewin explained to NS and her husband that if Attorney Lewin tried to sell her behavior to the police prosecutor and the Clerk-Magistrate as an “accident or mistake” that the police would not cooperate nor would the Clerk-Magistrate.

December 19, 2021

Operating Under the Influence Trial – NOT Guilty

by Robert D. Lewin

On the Friday after Thanksgiving 2020, SP, a 32 year old electrical engineer from Dorchester, and his girlfriend spent the day visiting with family and friends. The last stop was with family in Haverhill where they visited from about 7:00 pm to 11:00 pm. They left the house in Haverhill and headed back toward Boston. SP was driving and his girlfriend, who had had quite a bit to drink, quickly fell asleep. As SP was driving down I-93 South a State Police Officer was at the side of the road operating a lidar speed gun. SP was timed at 81 mph. The trooper began a pursuit and got behind SP and put on his blue lights. SP moved from the left lane across the middle lane to the right lane. According to the Trooper SP hesitated and finally pulled into the breakdown lane and stopped. According to the Trooper SP had traveled 1/2 mile after being signaled to stop before finally coming to a stop.

The Trooper then approached the passenger side of the vehicle and immediately observed an open 12 pack of White Claw alcoholic seltzer on the floor of the front passenger seat and he noticed an open 12 oz. can of Seltzer leaning against the center console on the passenger side. The passenger was sleeping but awoke when the trooper knocked his flashlight against the window and shined the light inside the car. SP put the passenger window down and the Trooper immediately noticed a strong odor of liquor coming form the car. According to the Trooper SP’s “eyes were glassy and red and he spoke with a thick tongue in a very slow demeanor as if he was heavily contemplating his response prior to answering any questions”. When the Trooper asked SP where they were coming from the Trooper wrote in his report that SP “looked at me with a blank stare on his face”. The Trooper asked SP to step from the vehicle and according to the Trooper SP stated “What if I don’t?” The Trooper then opened the car door and SP got out. According to the Trooper SP was unsteady and lethargic as he walked. The Trooper placed SP under arrest and placed him in the back of the police cruiser. Upon arrival at the State Police Barracks in Andover, SP was removed from the police car and brought up the flight of stairs to the rear entrance into the station. According to the Trooper as SP climbed the stairs he bounced “his left shoulder off the wall for balance near the top of the staircase”. SP was then booked, fingerprinted, refused the breath test, and was subsequently released. His girlfriend had also been brought to the barracks. She called her parents (in Mendon, MA!) who drove up to Andover to post the $40 bail and pick up their daughter and SP. They all left the station.

SP went to Lawrence District Court the following Monday where he was arraigned and his case was continued for a pre-trial hearing. SP sought out a lawyer. SP met with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately filed a Motion for copies of all recordings made by the police – all body cams, all dash cams, and all videos from the police station. There were no body cams and there were no dash cams. But there was a video from the booking room. The booking room video was an hour and eight minutes long. It was silent; no sound. It began when SP entered the booking room from the top of the stairs and it ends with SP leaving the booking room to exit the station. Attorney Lewin watched and studied the video. It was EXCELLENT. When SP stood and walked there was NO unsteadiness. He sat – in words that Attorney Lewin used during the trial – like a Sphinx. He did not fidget or sway or move. Attorney Lewin also interviewed SP’s girlfriend’s parents as they would be witnesses during the trial. Due to there not being any jury trials due to covid, the trial weas delayed, but finally took place on December 15, 2021 in Courtroom 5 in Lawrence District Court. In the week leading up to the trial Attorney Lewin had two trial prep sessions with SP and his girlfriend (via zoom) and one trial prep session with SP’s girlfriend’s parents. Attorney Lewin practiced with all of them and advised them of the types of questions they would be asked by the DA. This avoids any surprises.

December 12, 2021

Forgery, Uttering, and Larceny Charges Avoided

by Robert D. Lewin

MS, a 47 year old female immigrant from Haiti, received a Notice of a Clerk-Magistrate Hearing from Chelsea District Court. The Chelsea Police had applied for a criminal complaint against MS for two counts of Forgery (checks), two counts of Uttering, and two counts of Larceny By False Pretenses. All six counts are felonies and all of the charges could lead to deportation. MS had absolutely no idea what the charges were about.

MS consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin immediately went to Chelsea Court and obtained copies of the Application for Criminal Complaint and the underlying police report. The police had received information from a bank investigator that an account holder at the bank had noticed a series of debits in her bank account for checks that she had not written. The checks were forged. Two of the forged checks had been made payable to MS and had been deposited in MS’s account at the bank.

The police applied for a criminal complaint against MS. It turns out that MS had in fact opened a joint bank account with her son, who was a minor at the time. Some months after opening the account, the two large checks made payable to MS were deposited into the account. The checks were in fact forgeries. Attorney Lewin contacted the bank investigator and asked for documentation showing that MS’s bank account was in fact a joint account. The bank investigator furnished the documentation to Attorney Lewin. Attorney Lewin also asked for the documentation showing how the account was opened. The Account opening documents show signature cards for both MS and her son and the initial deposit was a work check from MS’s son’s employment. The two large forged checks that were deposited were made out to MS; however, they were deposited remotely online so there was no surveillance photos or videos to show who made the deposit.

December 12, 2021

Nurse Charged With Larceny From A Disabled Patient Found NOT Guilty After 2-Day Jury Trial

by Robert D. Lewin

DC, a male nurse in his mid thirties, was employed at an agency that provides care for disabled adults. Care is provided in the patients’ homes and patients are also brought to a center where there are day activities for them. DC began caring for Paul (not the patient’s real name) in 2014. Paul suffered from Klumpke paralysis and had virtually no use of his hands and arms and also suffered from some mental disabilities. DC had earned a Bachelors Degree in Nursing and from his earnings as a nurse supported himself, his wife, and two very young children. Paul had a can in his bedroom in which he kept cash. In July of 2019 Paul reported to his father that he (Paul) had witnessed DC reach in to the can and remove $1,200.00 in cash from the can which Paul said DC then put in his pocket. Paul’s father reported this to the Police. The police came out to Paul’s house and interviewed Paul. The interview was recorded. Paul told the police in that interview that the theft had occurred during the previous Fall (i.e. the Fall of 2018) and that DC had taken the money and purchased a wood stove with it.

The police went to Newburyport District Court and took out a criminal complaint against DC for Larceny Over $250 from a Disabled Person. (The statute has now been changed from $250 to $1,200). The charge is a felony and a conviction would cost DC his Registration as a Nurse and a conviction certainly would have meant jail. DC consulted with and retained Attorney Robert Lewin from Andover. Attorney Lewin explained to DC that the case would take a great deal of preparation and would require a jury trial. There were a number of witnesses who had to be interviewed. Attorney Lewin’s investigator (a retired Chief of Police and former president of the Massachusetts Association of Private Investigators) did yeoman’s work in locating the witnesses and getting statements from the witnesses that would prove very helpful at the trial. DC provided Attorney Lewin with hundreds of pages of text messages between DC and Paul over a period of 3 years. Never once in those three years of text messages did Paul ever mention anything about DC stealing money. DC provided Attorney Lewin with twelve months of voice messages left by Paul on DC’s phone. Never once in any of those voice messages did Paul ever mention anything about DC stealing money. (Attorney Lewin has been practicing criminal law since 1971 and no client has worked as hard as DC did in helping to prepare his defense.) With Covid-19 it took 20 months to get a trial date. On May 4, 2021 a trial date of October 9, 2021 was set. That date got pushed back to November 9, 2021. In the weeks leading up to the trial Attorney Lewin and DC spent hours and hours preparing for the trial. Attorney Lewin interviewed and re-interviewed DC and his wife to prepare them for testifying in court. All of the recordings of the voice messages were readied to be played for the jury. All of the text messages were transcribed.

On November 9, 2021 all the parties appeared at Court ready for trial. A Jury was empaneled. The trial began. Paul and his father and the lead police investigator testified for the Commonwealth. Attorney Lewin called DC’s two supervisors, a co-worker who also had treated Paul, DC’s wife and then DC himself. DC was the last witness and his testimony finished at about 4:00 PM on November 9. On November 10, 2021 the parties all returned to Court. Attorney Lewin made a very forceful closing argument for a not guilty verdict. The Assistant District Attorney made a forceful closing argument for conviction. The Judge gave the jury their instructions and the Jurors went to the jury room to deliberate at about 11:30 AM. At 1:00 PM the court recessed for lunch. At 2:00 PM when all parties returned from lunch the Court Officer informed the Court that the Jury had reached a verdict. The jurors filed into the Courtroom. The Clerk instructed DC to stand. DC stood and the Clerk asked the foreperson of the Jury: “Madame foreperson has the jury reached a verdict.” The foreperson answered “Yes” The Clerk asked: “What say you, is the Defendant Guilty or Not Guilty of Larceny over $250 from a Disabled Person?”. The foreperson answered: “NOT guilty”