by

Once again, you are being arrested in Boston. Maybe you are out for a “night out on the town” and the town, and its inhabitants, has turned on you. Perhaps you are carrying something that has been branded as illegal…such as a gun or some drugs. Maybe there is a warrant out for your arrest and, for some reason, those police officers on the corner are looking at you kinda funny. Whatever the circumstances are, members of law enforcement are coming to approach you and they are not baring gifts…except for the Commonwealth’s Bracelets of Shame. Oh, how you wish you had your lawyer standing right beside you.

But you don’t.

You are on your own until you can get to the experienced criminal defense attorney whom you long ago learned from this daily blog you should consult.

What to do.

In today’s weekly Thursday Attorney Sam’s Take, we look at these crucial moments during which time you will decide how to respond to the approaching officers. If you are a regular reader to this blog, you probably know a lot of what I am about to tell you already. However, it is worth reviewing, since getting it wrong could cost you a lot of years.
Continue reading

by

In Lynn District Court, teenager Jonathan Caruso attended his arraignment on Monday, pleading not guilty to charges of negligent vehicle homicide, being a minor transporting liquor, and operating under the influence of alcohol in the deadly pedestrian accident that killed a 67-year-old woman and seriously injured her daughter early Saturday morning. Caruso, 18, is a Saugus High School senior who had stayed out all night with friends after attending his prom the night before.

The deadly Massachusetts pedestrian accident occurred at Grove and Essex streets. A police report indicates that Caruso told them that he had been drinking and may have fallen asleep while driving. He says he regained consciousness after hitting a street sign. A friend who was in the car told him that he had struck two pedestrians. Caruso, who took a breath analysis test after the Saugus car accident, registered a .02% BAC. The legal limit for Massachusetts drivers under 21 is .02%.

Carol Marean died from her pedestrian injuries. Her 41-year-old daughter, Charlotte, sustained critical injuries. The two of them had gone out that morning to walk their dog.

The judge ordered the teenager held on $7,500 cash bail. Caruso will also have to abide by a 7pm to 7am curfew and go back to court in July for a pretrial hearing.

A Massachusetts OUI/DWI/DUI offense is a serious offense in the state-especially if someone was injured or killed as a result of the alleged drunk driving incident. An experienced Boston DUI lawyer can protect your rights and comb through all of the evidence to make sure that the best avenues of defense are available to you.

The more serious the criminal charges against you, the greater the penalties and the longer the sentencing periods that could await you. You need a good Massachusetts criminal defense law firm working for you.

Student arraigned in death of pedestrian, Boston.com, May 19, 2009
Friends: Teen Accused In Fatal DUI No, WCVB, May 18, 2009
Read the Police Accident Report, Boston.com (PDF)”

Related Web Resources:
Police arrest 34 people, many teens, in get tough move on public drunkenness at Comcast Center concert in Mansfield, Enterprise News, May 19, 2009 Continue reading

by

Mr. John F., 32 of Quincy (hereinafter, the “Defendant”), needs a good lawyer.

According to law enforcement, his home housed some ill-advised contents. As a result, he is now being described as a mid-level drug dealer.

On Monday night, around 6:00pm, police raided the Defendant’s home. The Commonwealth claims that a search of the home resulted in the seizure of approximately 20 grams of crack, cocaine and weapons including two shotguns, one which had a sawed-off barrel, a 9 millimeter handgun with a defaced serial number and hollow-point bullets.

The Defendant himself was not found in the actual house. He was allegedly found in a detached garage where two shotguns and a Sig Sauer semi-automatic handgun were also discovered.

Police also indicate they found a box containing $1,100 in cash located above a suspended basement ceiling as well as another $1,700 in a bedroom, along with the 20 grams of crack found in the bedroom closet.
Continue reading

by

David Frank, of Boston’s Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, has reported this week on a story that has become achingly familiar. It involves the issue of the wrongfully convicted.

Ulysses C. (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) is now 59 years old. On May 17, 2001, he was released from prison after serving 19 years of an 80 year sentence for unlawful confinement, rape and robbery. He was released from custody after DNA testing on the physical evidence used against him exonerated him of the crimes for which he was convicted.

But, then, what does “exonerated” really mean? Does it clear a man’s name? Can it give him back the nineteen years he unjustly lost at the hands of the Commonwealth?

In recent years, a number of criminal defendants have been convicted, only to be released after having served many years, after DNA evidence was discovered which showed that they were not, in fact, guilty.

Interestingly, District Attorneys still try to fight attempts by convicted defendants to have DNA tested for some reason, which is odd given their sworn oath to “do Justice”.
Continue reading

by

Being a police officer in the big city can be dangerous. We all know that. Logan Airport, of course, is within the limits of the city of Boston. So, it is not too shocking that it can be a dangerous place. Usually, though, that danger does not come inside the packaging of a Mercedes Benz SUV and presented by a Wellesley businesswoman.

It did in March, though.

Last week, she resolved the matter.

She apologized.

Of course, “my bad” was not the first reaction that Margaret G., a 57-year-old portfolio manager and former Wellesley school board member (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) offered to law enforcement in this matter.
Continue reading

by

This week ends as last week ended. From Boston to Providence, and beyond, law makers and enforcers are struggling with how to address the problems presented by the so-called “Craigslist Killer” (hereinafter, “CLK”). The case grows almost daily as he is now facing murder charges in Massachusetts and assault/robbery charges in Rhode Island. One would imagine that prosecuting attorneys, politicians and law enforcement would be concentrating on bringing CLK to trial and working to prevent such murders.

…And you would be wrong.

Instead, the response seems to be to attack the victims’ profession and method of advertisement. In other words, do everything possible to keep sex workers like the victims in the shadows of society so that they can continue to be easy victims to people like Jack The Ripper and CLK.

The Massachusetts CLK case was the crime of murder. The Rhode Island Matter involved assault and robbery. The victims were both of the sex industry and they purportedly met CLK through the website Craigslist.com. There are no allegations of any sexual acts, voluntary or forced, having been a component on CLK’s violent crimes.

Yet, somehow, the matter is being treated as if it were about the sex trade.
Somehow, the work of a twisted killer has become the fault of the profession of prostitution as well as Craigslist’s posting of ads which have, it turns out, sometimes been fronts for said trade.

And so, this past Wednesday apparently marked a great victory for humanity everywhere. Justice is finally being done and we are one step closer to murder-free.
Continue reading

by

You are arrested in Massachusetts. Being an avid reader of the daily Boston Criminal Law Blog, you know that what you do in the next few minutes could mean the difference between sleeping at home or at the local jail for the next few weeks. You remember that there were a variety of postings that had talked about things that could help and things that could hurt your chances at being released on low bail. But it was always about this story or that story…never a simple overview about bail and what determines an arrestee’s bail conditions.

Until now, that is.

In this, the latest edition of our weekly Thursday Attorney Sam’s Take, where we discuss certain issues facing people in the criminal justice system, we tackle the pre-trial release question.

Most people have heard about a “right to bail”. However, that “right” has been compromised over the years as the courts have been weighing it against the rest of the community’s rights.

The issue of bail is chiefly about the question of whether a criminal defendant is likely to return to court to answer the charges against him or her as it proceeds, over the next several months, to trial. The theory is that if the court is holding some of the defendant’s money, then the defendant will be less likely to flee. Therefore, at a bail hearing, one hears the prosecutor giving all the reasons the defendant to believe the defendant will not come back to court, while the defense attorney argues all the reasons to believe he will return to court.

While the strength of government’s case will likely be argued, it is not the real issue in a bail hearing. Therefore, simply arguing the facts as if the underlying case had now gone to trial, alone, is not that much help. However, it is relevant if one can persuade the court that the case against the defendant is weak and therefore he has every reason to want to return to challenge the non-existing evidence and clear his name.

This is the same reasoning in considering the seriousness of the case. For example, if the defendant has been charged with murder, considered the most serious of cases and punishable by either life imprisonment without parole or, in the federal system, the death penalty, the courts consider that these potential outcomes are usually enough reason to make a defendant not want to return for the outcome. These kinds of cases are among the few times a defendant can be held without bail for actual bail purposes.
Continue reading

by

It has been awhile since the daily Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog has received news from the “Hey, I’ll Bet I Can Make This Situation Worse” Club. Months ago, their members appeared quite frequently in my postings. Not to worry, though. They are back and one unfortunate member needs a criminal lawyer.

The story may strike you as familiar.

This incident took place yesterday, May 12th. The previous incident to which I refer was the subject of this blog on March 12th.

Yesterday’s scene, according to the Boston Herald, took place at the Natick Collection mall. A couple were out together, enjoying enjoying an afternoon of nice weather and theft. Lt. Brian Grassey says that, at approximately 4:00pm, two plainclothes detectives from Natick police were at the mall “and made observations of what appeared to be a store larceny unfolding right in front of them.”

In other words, shoplifting.

The suspects were a man and a woman. Mall security chased the couple from a Sunglass Hut. When the woman was detained, the gentleman decided the date was over and took off. She has been charged with shoplifting in excess of $100 and conspiracy.

While the gentleman’s evening activities with his lady-friend may have been over…the officers felt that they were deserving of some quality time with him too. They followed the man outside and detectives saw him get into his car to leave the area.
Continue reading

by

In the US District Court in Massachusetts, Assistant US Attorney Suzanne Sullivan is asking Judge Mark L. Wolf not to impose sanctions on her for withholding evidence in a Massachusetts gun case. The federal prosecutor says that she made a mistake when she did not introducing the evidence and she is asking for leniency. The evidence that she withheld could have cleared the defendant.

The federal prosecutor failed to reveal that the testimony that a Boston cop provided at a pretrial hearing contradicted what the office had told her numerous times. It was Judge Wolf who discovered that evidence had been withheld. In January, the judge dismissed the gun charges against Darwin E Jones, who was arrested in the 2007 Boston gun case, and a tentative plea agreement has been reached over Massachusetts drug charges filed against Jones.

Wolf says he is evaluating several sanctions that he could impose against Sullivan. Sanctions could include a fine and/or an order that she and all 90 prosecutors in her office undergo training regarding their constitutional obligation to not withhold this type of evidence.

Wolf says he doesn’t think Sullivan didn’t deliberately intend to not share the evidence but that she withheld the information is an act of reckless disregard and ignorance that is unpardonable. He says that prosecutors in the US Attorney’s Office tend to exhibit a pattern of withholding evidence.

The judge has asked US Attorney General Eric H. Holder to take action against prosecutors that neglect to share certain information that could set defendants free. Wolf notes that the Boston office has a history of committing violations that are “intentional and inadvertent.” His letter to Holder, dated April 23rd, noted not just Sullivan’s error but also Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Auerhahn’s misconduct against Vinnie Ferrrara and mistakes made during the Bulger era.

Prosecutorial Misconduct
Prosecutorial misconduct can adversely affect a defendant’s case. In certain cases, a person might have been exonerated if only the prosecutor hadn’t engaged in some form of misconduct. An experienced Boston criminal defense law firm can protect you from such misconduct and do everything possible to ensure the best outcome for your Massachusetts criminal case.

Some Examples of Prosecutorial Misconduct:

• Introducing inadmissible evidence in a case • Discriminating against jurors because of their gender or ethnicity
• Mischaracterizing evidence of facts • Withholding evidence • Tampering with evidence • Destroying evidence • Witness tampering • Issuing improper public statements about a suspect/defendant or a criminal case.

Federal prosecutor admits mistake, begs for leniency, Boston Globe, May 12, 2009
Mark Wolf not sheepish about exposing court misconduct, Boston Herald, April 29, 2009
Prosecutorial Misconduct, Justice Works
Related Web Resources:
Chief Judge Blasts US Attorney Over ‘Egregious Failure’ to Disclose, ABA Journal, January 27, 2009
United States Department of Justice
Continue reading

by

Monday saw the dawning of a new week. Boston-area newspapers, however, are discussing what is really an old problem. The subject of illegal possession of firearms is once again in focus. Let’s take a story from the town of Lawrence, for example. Police say that a 20 year old gentleman, Emmanuel M. (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) will now be needing the help of a criminal defense attorney due to his arrest early Saturday for firing a gun in the middle of West Street.

When police were dispatched to a pizza shop near Cross Street and Broadway shortly after midnight, they say they noticed the Defendant pull out a black handgun and begin to run.

Well, kinda run.

After tripping several times as he dodged police cruisers – bouncing off one – the Defendant is said to have thrown his gun over a 3-foot high fence on Holly St. as he was wrestled to the ground by Officer Carleton Trombly.

Officer Christopher Bussey assisted Trombly in arresting the Defendant. Police said they believe that the Defendant had been drinking as they smelled the odor of alcohol on his breath and found a 1-liter bottle of vodka in his backpack that was half full. The police also say they recovered a .22-caliber handgun with a spent casing in the chamber 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 © 2024, Altman & Altman LLP
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design