by

You are driving around on a wintery Massachusetts night, maybe after a couple of drinks that you are sure did not effect you. All of a sudden there is a large bumping feeling and a sound that tells you that you have hit something. The temptation is to put the problem, whatever it may be, behind you and to get out of there fast. You think that to do otherwise is foolhardy and could cost you your license and the need to hire one of those criminal defense attorneys.

Avoid that temptation. The fact is that leaving the scene of an accident, whether physical injury to a person or simply property damage was caused, only makes a bad situation worse.

Let’s look at a couple of very recent examples.

17-year old Sandwich teen, Sarah G. (hereinafter, “:Teen Defendant”) began the new year after collecting a bunch of charges that were only made worse by leaving the scene. She is drove into the rear of a police cruiser. She then apparently tried to leave the scene but was apprehended shortly thereafter. She is now facing charges which include leaving the scene of an accident, unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle, failure to stop for police and underage alcohol possession, according to the Cape Cod Times.
Continue reading

by

Last week, we discussed two scenarios whereby you received a compulsory invitation to attend the Boston Municipal Court to answer charges for a variety of potential charges, including assault, drugs and OUI.

Now, however, the matter has been raised to another level. The Commonwealth has decided to indict you. You have just received the year-end news from either your attorney or another summons in the mail.

So, what is an indictment? Well, it is like the criminal complaint that was issued back in district court. In that case, either the police or your neighbor sought the complaint. The prosecutor did not really get involved until the matter was in district court. At some point, a prosecutor reviewed the allegations of the matter and decided that either your criminal past or the allegations themselves were deserving of more serious treatment. “More serious” generally means “more jail/prison time”.
Continue reading

by

Brooke Mueller, the wife of actor Charlie Sheen, is seeking to have the restraining order against her husband modified. According to TMZ.com, she wants a judge to allow the two of them to be able to contact each other so they can work on the problems in their marriage. Her attorney reportedly told TMZ that his client and her husband still love each other and that the alleged dispute occurred during “one bad night.”

The 44-year-old TV actor was arrested on Christmas Day following an alleged domestic violence dispute with his wife. Sheen was charged with criminal mischief, assault, and menacing with a deadly weapon. Mueller told authorities that Sheen threatened her with a knife after telling him she wanted a divorce. The two of them reportedly had been arguing for several hours.

Sheen, however, is denying that he strangled his wife or held a knife to her. Police officers found a folding knife locked in an open position in the actor’s travel back.

Meantime, Stan Rosenfield, Sheen’s spokesperson stressed the importance of not jumping to conclusions over what may or may not have happened.

Sheen was released early on Christmas evening after he posted $8,500 bond.

Domestic Violence
Altercations between couples can be complicated and most situations are never clear-cut. This can create problems for a person who is accused by another of domestic violence. Even if the alleged victim decides to recant his or her accusations, the accused can still be charged and convicted for this crime.

Charlie Sheen’s wife asks judge to modify restraining order, CNN, December 30, 2009
Charlie Sheen’s Wife Claims Knife Threat in Assault, ABC News, December 28, 2009

Related Web Resource:
Massachusetts Law About Domestic Violence, Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries Continue reading

by

So, yesterday, you weighed your options and you decided to follow the advice of the Boston Police Department rather than ol’ Attorney Sam in dealing with the Clerk Magistrate’s Hearing. You just ambled in on your own, gave it your best shot, and walked out with a date to return to court for an arraignment.

Now what?

Well, by some unrealistic trick of time, your arraignment was set for tomorrow.

Wonderful. Nothing like a little pressure for the holidays, right?

Let’s also assume that you learned your lesson and that, on the way out of court yesterday, new summons in hand, you did not ask Officer Gotcha if you need to hire a lawyer by tomorrow and, if so, you did not follow his advice when he looked at you as if you had three heads and sneered, “Nah. They’ll give ya a free one. Don’t worry about it. Hey, by the way….never too late to make a statement you know.,,.!”
Continue reading

by

You live in Boston. You arer relaxing at home, watching the children play with their new Christmas gifts before they break them. It is a Norman Rockwell scene…except for one tiny detail. You suddenly remember that invitation (summons) you received last week to witness Massachusetts jurisprudence (court) in action. In other words, you have to go to court to answer on that drunk driving charge tomorrow and you still have not even contacted a lawyer!

Game over? Just give up and expect you won’t be returning home for a couple of years? Maybe it is time for that extended vacation out of the country you always dreamed about?

Well, chances are, particularly if you had received a summons and were not arrested, it is not that bad. There are, however, a few things you should know and at least one thing you should do.

First of all, the summons was for one of two things – either an arraignment or a clerk magistrate’s hearing.

As most readers of this daily blog know, a clerk’s hearing is basically the last step before arraignment in cases in which you have been lucky enough to get one. It is the hearing to decide whether or not there is probable cause to issue the complaint which would bring you to an arraignment. At such a hearing, a clerk magistrate listens to evidence presented (sometimes solely by an investigating officer) and decides whether the elements of the accused crime are met. It is a very simple, and low, standard. Should the clerk find that there is probable cause, a complaint will be ordered and the next step will be arraignment.
Continue reading

by

Due to the holiday season, and accompanying “end of year crunch” with emergency hearings and other court dates, the otherwise (mostly) daily schedule of the Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog is being interrupted this and next week. However, we will be back in our daily format after the new year.

Next week, there will be three postings which should be of interest, though, so do not totally give up on us for the holidays. On Monday, we will tackle the question “I have court tomorrow – what do I do?” Then, we will follow up on the federal detention hearing we began earlier this week and its tales of arson, drugs and murder.

And then? Well, you will have to wait and see.

Continue reading

by

Richard and Mayumi Heene received their sentences for their roles in the balloon hoax involving their six-year-old son Falcon. Both of them pleaded guilty last month to criminal charges. Mayumi pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of knowingly filing a false report with emergency services and Richard pleaded guilty to a felony charge of knowingly and falsely attempting to influence a public servant.

The Heenes captured the media spotlight last October after they contacted 911 to report that they thought Falcon may have flown off in a flying saucer-like balloon that Richard had constructed. TV cameras followed rescuers as they chased after the balloon in an attempt to bring him back to safety. The 6-year-old was later found in the family garage. Questions about whether the incident was a hoax came up when Falcon replied during a CNN interview that the escapade was done for a “show.” Mayumi later admitted that the balloon boy story was a hoax.

At his sentencing, Richard apologized for the incident. The judge abided by a plea agreement, sentencing him to 90 days in jail starting January 11, four years probation, and 100 hours of community services during those years. Heene is allowed to serve the last 60 days in a work release program but has to sleep in jail at night.

Mayumi is sentenced to 20 days in jail (not as much time as what prosecutors sought), four years probation, and 120 hours of community service. Mayumi’s sentence begins after her husband’s sentence is over so that one of them can remain with the kids. She can also serve her time on weekends.

Mayumi and Richard are ordered to pay restitution.

‘Balloon boy’ parents plead guilty, MSNBC, November 13, 2009
Balloon Boy Parents Richard Heene, Mayumi Heene Get Jail Time, Probation, ABC, December 23, 2009
‘Balloon boy’ parents plead guilty, CNN, November 13, 2009
Related Web Resources:
Timeline Of Balloon Boy Events, ABC 7, October 16, 2009
General Laws of Massachusetts
Continue reading

by

A Boston federal drug case is keeping lawyers and politicians on their feet.

Yesterday, there was a detention hearing for Lawrence T., 51, of wakefield (hereinafter, “Defendant 1”). He stands accused of illegal sale of OxyContin. Defendant 1 has a co-defendant, John F., 31 (hereinafter, “Defendant 2”). Defendant 2 just happens to be a key City Hall operative who faces an indictment charging him with the drug crimes.

Well, Defendant 2’s status as an “operative” is a bit more specific than that…he is Mayor Thomas M. Menino’s neighborhood liaison to East Boston. His indictment came down on Thursday for possession with intent to distribute OxyContin and possession with intent to distribute marijuana.

East Boston residents are speaking out about the matter, pointing out that drugs have been a plague on the neighborhood for years. But, now, there is even more evidence of how “high up” the problem reaches –namely, the arrest of one of the area’s rising political stars.
Continue reading

by

Okay, here is the unfortunate truth of the matter – safeguarding Constitutional rights does not always bring happy results. Sometimes the cost is tragic. Most of the professionals involved in the criminal justice understand that. Massachusetts Kingston Police Chief Joseph Rebello is not one of those professionals apparently. I am guessing he is not a big fan of criminal defense attorneys either.

Nor is he likely to enjoy today’s blog.

The man at the heart of the story is Joseph G., a 26 year-old construction worker, of Kingston (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). He was arraigned last week on charges that he sexually assaulted a girlfriend’s 3-year-old daughter in Kingston. It was his second such charge. In fact, he had been charged this summer with raping another child.

The most recent matter came into being while the Defendant was free on bail.
Continue reading

by

Dear readers,

As you may have noticed, this daily criminal law blog has been rather sparse this week. this has been due to a conspiracy between court dates and internet failures. However, the Bostoncriminallawyerblog will return in full swing on Monday. Here in Boston, we take these things seriously, as do I.

On Monday, we start with a story of rape, a two-time defendant and A police chief against the right to bail.

Continue reading
Contact Information
Cambridge, MA
Main Office
675 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
Phone: 617.206.1920Fax: 617.491.3299Toll Free: 800.481.6199
Boston, MA
1 State St
Suite 2
Boston, MA 02109
Phone: 617.547.1205Toll Free: 800.481.6199
Needham, MA
250 First Avenue 2nd Floo
Needham, MA 02494
Phone: 781.675.2329Toll Free: 800.481.6199

Some Select Cases are referred to other attorneys for principal responsibility

By publishing this information on this Website, the Boston, Massachusetts law firm of Altman & Altman LLP is not claiming to represent any clients or cases mentioned here. The content provided is designed to inform readers and is not intended as legal advice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

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 © 2025, Altman & Altman LLP
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design