by

It is Thursday and so, as any regular reader of the daily Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog knows, it is time for another Attorney Sam’s Take discussion about an area in the law which effects those who have found themselves involved in the criminal justice system. Today we examine the truth about being on probation.

If you have not experienced it yourself or through a loved one, probationary circumstances generally come about in one of two ways. The first is, after being re-named “Defendant”, one is allowed to await trial unencumbered by steel bars.

While this type of probation generally has no extra conditions (except keeping away from the complainant if there is one), it can have conditions. The one condition it always carries, however, may seem obvious…but the consequences usually are not. This is the condition of not getting arrested, or gifted with new criminal charges, while in this “bail” posture. What many people do not realize, although the court is now required to tell them upon the continuance of the case, is that if they do pick up new charges, they can be held on the present case in custody without any bail for up to 60 days.

That’s right…I did not say “convicted”. I was talking about simply being charged. For those of you scratching your heads, sensing an inconsistency, you are correct. This would mean that you could be held in custody without any bail on a matter in which you are still presumed innocent because you have been merely accused of another crime…of which you are presumed innocent and will not even face trial for a number of months.

As I have many times explained, simply being charged is the violation. It does not matter that you have not been convicted of anything.
Continue reading

by

Every once in a while, a news story prompts me to admit something about my personal life. This is one of those. The confession is that I grew up loving comic books, or, as they are now called, “graphic novels”. Given the popularity of superhero movies of the last several years, I guess I was not alone. I particularly enjoyed the ones involving super-heroes who went out and fought crime. Many of the superheroes, such as Daredevil, usually worked alone (incidentally, his secret identity, Mathew Murdock was a criminal defense attorney), acted alone. However, there were various groupings of heroes, such as the X-Men, Avengers and Justice League of America, who worked together to fight threats to the universe. Sometimes the action was as close as New York or Boston…sometimes far away in other countries and planets.

Of course, that was all just fantasy…or was it?

According to yesterday’s Boston Globe, there exists a “crime club” right here in the Boston area. It’s secret headquarters is nestled in that institution of scientific education, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, otherwise known as Cambridge’s own “MIT”.

MIT students are no strangers to criminal justice controversy. Not too long ago, for example, there was that incident of a student and criminal charges for terrorizing armed security personnel.

But who knew there was a secret cabal called a “Crime Club”?
Continue reading

by

Police have charged Amanda Brumfield, movie star Billy Bob Thornton’s 29-year-old daughter, with child neglect causing harm or disability. The criminal charge stems from the death of a toddler that she babysat last October. The baby was 1.

Brumfield reportedly told police that the baby she was taking care struck her head after falling out of a playpen. She was unable to revive the toddler and sought help two hours after the fall accident.

Autopsy results indicate that the girl sustained a traumatic brain injury and fractured her skull. The medical examiner ruled the baby’s death a homicide.

Police say that Brumfield’s account of what happened is not consistent with the toddler’s injuries. Police said they don’t believe that a 1-year-old can balance on a playpen railing. They agree that the toddler struck her head, but they say the force of impact had to have been harder than just falling out of a playpen.

Massachusetts Child Abuse
In the state of Massachusetts, the Department of Social Services looks into all cases involving potential child abuse. Child abuse allegations may include those involving Shaken Baby Syndrome, child rape, physical assault, indecent assault and battery, and child pornography.

According to the Department of Children and Families, Massachusetts ranks #2 among US states for having the most reported child abuse cases. In 2008, there were 119,247 Massachusetts child abuse cases reported-that’s 13 more a day than the number of Massachusetts child abuse cases that were reported in 2007.

That said, not every person accused of or arrested for child abuse is guilty, and parents, stepparents, grandparents, uncles, aunts, siblings, babysitters, and other caregivers can find themselves facing criminal charges for a crime they did not commit.

The best way to combat the Massachusetts child abuse charges against you is to speak with an experienced Boston criminal defense law firm about your case.

Thornton’s daughter arrested after baby’s death, MSNBC.com, May 31, 2009
Report: Thornton’s daughter charged in kid’s death, AP, May 31, 2009
Lynn child abuse rates outpacing most of U.S., ItemLive.com, June 1, 2009
Related Web Resources:
Office of Health and Human Services, Mass.gov
What is Child Abuse and Neglect?, Childwelfare.gov Continue reading

by

Two Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorneys have new clients resulting from their dealings with local police departments this past weekend. The two men handled the situation differently, but both methods ended in the same place…custody.

First there was the adventure of Randy G., 25 of Boston (hereinafter, “Defendant 1”). Defendant1 indicated that he was rather fond of doing business with a certain undercover police officer. In fact, he liked him so much, he thought it would be nice for the undercover to be a regular customer for his drug trade.

How did he do that? Well, the good old fashioned way – he tried to entice him with a bargain. He offered the undercover detective a lower price on crack, cocaine, if he would buy in volume.

The bargain was that Defendant1 would sell the UC seven or eight bags of crack for only one hundred dollars if he agreed to join his cadre of regular customers.

Not a bad deal…if you are in the market for that sort of thing.

The UC, however, wasn’t. He responded by offering Defendant1 a pair of the Commonwealth’s Bracelets of Shame. It was a deal Defendant1 could not refuse. Literally.
Continue reading

by

As last week ended, many of us were still preparing for the summer weather which seems to taunt us in the Boston area every few days. Other, less mundane, issues were consuming the thoughts of Robert L. of Gloucester (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). He and his defense lawyer were awaiting a verdict in his Homicide trial in Lawrence Superior Court.

The jury returned Friday with a mixed verdict for him. He was found to be not guilty of manslaughter, but will still be serving the next three to six years in state prison for the selling of prescription painkillers.

The case dates back to December 17, 2004, when Richard B., 38, (hereinafter, the “Deceased”) died after paramedics found him in cardiac arrest, unconscious and not breathing, in his car outside his Essex Street house. Law enforcement believed that the Deceased had overdosed on a drug known as Fentanyl which had been contained in a patch designed for slow absorption through the skin that he had apparently opened and ingested.

After more than a year of investigation, the Commonwealth decided that the Defendant, 43 at the time, had sold the Deceased, his co-worker, the drug for $50 after a Christmas party. Given the unhappy result, they not only charged him of the sale of the drug, but also with manslaughter.
Continue reading

by

In Hampshire Superior Court, a Massachusetts jury acquitted 19-year-old John Robison of charges that he set off explosives to intentionally cause injury or property damage. If convicted, the Amherst teen could have been sentenced to up to 20 years in prison. Formal charges against him included one count of setting off detonating devices close to property or people and three counts of malicious explosion.

In 2008, a vendor of laboratory equipment that became suspicious about an order the teenager placed contacted South Hadley police. The cops, who went to Robison’s home, spent three days evacuating volatile chemicals, including some of what they considered “high explosives,” from the residence. They worked with the FBI on safely removing the explosives. Neighbors were asked to temporarily evacuate their homes at this time.

Robison, who has had an interest in chemistry since he was a young boy, set of explosions at the town landfill, in his father’s home, and in the woods. He posted footage of these explosions on YouTube.

According to Robison’s criminal defense attorney, none of the footage showed any property damage, except for weeds getting scorched and dirt in the woods getting moved around. The teenager, who testified at his own trial, says that he was extremely cautious in making sure no one would get hurt by his experiments. He also says he would not allow people that he considered offensive or dangerous to log onto a Web site that he created to promote his experiments.

Robison’s Massachusetts defense lawyer has always maintained that no evidence ever existed to support the criminal charges against his client and that both the indictment and the criminal trial should never have happened. Unfortunately, indictments can be brought against you even when you are not guilty of committing a crime. The best defense is a proactive defense by Boston criminal defense attorneys that know how to protect you and your rights.

Mass. teen cleared or explosives charges, Boston.com, May 28, 2009
John Robison of Amherst found innocent of malicious explosion charges, MassLive.com, May 27, 2009

Related Web Resources:
Teen-ager indicted for ‘malicious explosion’, MassLive, April 2, 2008
YouTube
Continue reading

by

Yesterday’s Boston Globe contained the story of a “standout” high school football star who now is not looking for a talent scout, but a criminal defense attorney. While he had been scheduled to bring his athletic prowess to college, his future is now in doubt due to allegations of demonstrating them at the wrong place and time.

The crimes alleged are of the Massachusetts assault and battery variety and have invoked further suspicion of ongoing domestic abuse.

It would appear that Mathew G., 18, of Dracut (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) and his girlfriend are parting ways. His 17-year-old ladyfriend has accused the Defendant of hitting her early Sunday morning in a rage of alcohol-fueled jealousy at a party in Lowell. Apparently, this assault included pouring beer over her head as she talked to another male. She also claims that the Defendant punched her in the face when she ran away from him, refusing to return.

The Defendant was arrested was arraigned on domestic assault and battery charges in Lowell District Court on Tuesday, during which time he pleaded “not guilty”. While both he and his court-appointed attorney have refused to make any public comment, his ex-girlfriend has indicated that this is not the first time the Defendant has struck her.

While the complainant declined a ride to the hospital, the officers say that they saw redness on her face, presumably from the Defendant’s blow.
Continue reading

by

I remember years ago, before I was a lawyer, growing up in the Boston area and hearing commercials about what happens if you are arrested for possessing a gun. “If you are caught with a gun”, I recall it saying, “you will go to jail for one year…and nobody can get you out”. The tone of the announcement made it clear that the possession of guns was behind the ever-worsening crime problem.

And, then, came the other public service announcements which declared, “Guns don’t kill people, People kill people.”

And so it seemed to me that the obvious solution would be to simply send the guns to jail for a year with no hope them of getting out.

Then came my education at the hands of the Boston University School of Law, the Kings County District Attorney’s Office and, finally, my many years as a Massachusetts criminal defense attorney. Throughout these years, I have seen the gun issue from many different perspectives. All of these perspectives get a voice in the realities of the criminal justice system.

The result?

There is no one clear and simple answer as to how gun possession is handled by the courts. As with most things in the criminal justice system, it depends on the circumstances. There is no simple, issue-free gun possession case. This is why you need an experienced criminal defense attorney to guide you through the morass of potential scenarios when facing prosecution for possessing a firearm.

And that is why this week’s Attorney Sam’s Take discussion is about gun possession in Massachusetts.
Continue reading

by

Dogs are considered “Man’s Best Friend”. In the Boston area, though, they are particularly close with “man” involved in criminal prosecutions. After almost a quarter century as an attorney, I can finally see the day coming when I may have to cross-examine a pooch. A number of cases this very month underscore the canine war against crime.

Let’s start with a story from the Boston Herald this very Tuesday. Michael P., 52, of Allston (hereinafter, “Defendant 1”) had a bit of an altercation with his neighbor’s German shepherd. Yes, the altercation included Defendant1’s assault of the dog.

You see, Defendant 1 says he was frustrated and angry with the dog because it constantly barked at him from behind a fence. For some reason, Defendant1 apparently thought that throwing hot coffee in the dog’s face might clear up the issue.

The police were called to the scene. While the dog’s owner told prosecutors that his dog suffered no injuries, the officers were still able to smell the coffee on the dog’s fur.
Continue reading

by

In Massachusetts, state and federal judges have issued arrest warrants for the capture of Cynthia Dziurgot, a Clinton attorney who has disappeared. Dziurgot, who owes her ex-husband almost a million dollars, failed to appear at bankruptcy and probate proceedings this month. Now US Marshals are looking for her. Foul play is not suspected at this time. Her lawyer says he has not heard from her for several weeks.

Dziurgot’s ex-husband, John Farnsworth, filed for divorce from her. They were married over 10 years and separated for five months. A Massachusetts judge granted their divorce in 2008. As part of the terms of their divorce settlement, Diziurgot was supposed to pay her ex-husband $650,966 plus $100,000 in legal fees. With interest, this amount has grown.

Diziurgot filed for bankruptcy protection. Last November, she was found in contempt of the judge’s order for failing to pay her ex-husband the money she owes him and was briefly sent to Framingham State Prison in December. Her attorney managed to temporarily stay the 90-day sentence. During a number of Probate Court hearings in February, Dziurgot stated that she could not afford to pay her ex-husband.

A number of creditors have also been pursuing her over her bankruptcy cases. The Clinton attorney owns an elaborate mansion that is currently in receivership. The 21-room residence is being sold for $699,900.

Dziurgot is a well-respected member of the Clinton community. She serves on Clinton Hospital’s Board of Directors and was previously named Wachusett Chamber of Commerce’s Professional of the Year.

Massachusetts Arrest Warrants
If a judge has issued an arrest warrant issued ordering police to bring you to a Massachusetts court, you should contact an experienced Boston criminal defense law firm right away to help you deal with this. Unfortunately, outstanding warrants don’t just go away and harsher penalties can start to pile up the longer you wait to take care of this matter.

Lawyer locked in nasty divorce feud on the run, Boston Herald, May 25, 2009
Truant lawyer is ordered arrested by second court, Telegram.com, May 20, 2009

Related Web Resource:
Massachusetts criminal records search, CRS 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