by

I wish I could say “you don’t see this everyday…” but that would probably not be true.

We have always had people engaging in sexual crimes. However, the norms of what used to be acceptable (kind of) have changed. The bottom line is that one cannot force another person to have sex with them.

It does not matter if it is a husband and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend or even prostitute and client.

And even if the soon-to-be complainant is not inclined to make a criminal case out of it, she might not have a choice. Once it is reported, it is the state or federal government’s case and they are going to run with it. Further, the crime of rape is not merely a sex crime anymore if it happens among those in a romantic or family relationship…it is also considered domestic violence.
Continue reading

by

The attorneys at the Law Offices of Samuel Goldberg, legal counsel to Altman & Altman, LLP recently walked out of Brighton Municipal Court with a huge victory for the civil rights of one our clients. As a result of our success, our client’s drug case is likely to be dismissed. Below is a brief set of facts describing the case and the legal reasoning of the judge for granting our motion to suppress.
Continue reading

by

It is easy for most of us to condemn a drunk driver. One should not drink alcohol and drive.

That’s pretty clear.

Sometimes, though, the lines are a bit blurrier when it comes to questions of safe driving. Take the recent case of a 65-year-old man from New York who just plowed into six pedestrians in East Orleans on Sunday.

Police say he may have fallen asleep while driving.

Orleans Police Lt. Kevin Higgins says that the man was headed toward Nauset Beach on Beach Road and was rounding the corner at the intersection with Nauset Heights Road when it appears he fell asleep. Higgins said it was as if he didn’t straighten the wheel to proceed down toward Nauset Beach, but instead continued the turn, hitting six of seven pedestrians who had their back to traffic and were walking on the right side of the road.
Continue reading

by

Surprise! I am not Ian. He will be with you next week with one of our “war stories”.

Speaking of surprises, here is a little tale from yesterday’s session in Salem Superior Court. As you know, anybody can suddenly find themselves with the sudden last name of “defendant”. Today’s example is Jose Martinez (hereinafter, naturally, the “Defendant”). This 47-year-old gentleman has been serving as a court officer in Essex County for many years.

Now, the Defendant is not putting the cuffs on another…he is wearing them himself. And will continue to do so unless and until the matter of $50,000 bail is dealt with.

The Defendant has been accused of repeatedly raping an inmate in his custody. The full roster of criminal charges include multiple counts of rape, indecent assault and battery and a count of misleading investigators. As for the sex charges, the Commonwealth says they are supported by DNA evidence.

More specifically, the Defendant is accused of sexually assaulting the female complainant three times at Lawrence District Court, once in 2009 and twice in 2014.

Continue reading

by

Folks are focused on the federal criminal appeal of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). While his appeals will be automatic because of his unusual penalty, all criminal defendants, especially if convicted after a trial, have the right to appeal their conviction.

The appeal, however, may not be what you think it is.

Let’s look at the Defendant’s appeal, for example. Most analysts opine that one of the primary grounds for appeal will be the court’s refusal to move the site of the trial. In fact, a number of articles, one of them being “Marathon bomber likely to appeal over Boston trial site” the experts forcast that the appeal will focus on the judge’s refusal to move the trial out of Boston and the prosecution’s barrage of emotional testimony from more than a dozen victims of the attack.

Clearly, nobody expects the basis of an appeal to be that the juror’s verdict of guilt was not based on the evidence. Yet, most people believe that a criminal appeal is really a chance to second-guess the jury.

It really isn’t.

Actually, it is to second-guess the judge.
Continue reading

by

As you know, I have been ensconced in the criminal justice system since the early 1980’s. One of the perks of being around so long, and being fairly successful, is that various media outlets often contact me to discuss some development in criminal justice. They know that I am a former prosecutor, have been a Boston criminal lawyer since 1990 and have handled several high profile cases. Last Friday, I was approached by various radio stations from Boston, Toronto and San Francisco.

They wanted to discuss the federal jury’s sentencing decision on the multi-murder case of convicted Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (hereinafter, the “Defendant”).

In case you missed it, the jurors unanimously suggested that the Defendant be put to death. Reports on the verdict, as well as more analysis than you could possibly want, abound throughout the media. One such article printed just after the verdict can be found in the Boston Globe, Jurors Did Not Believe Sympathetic Narrative About Tsarnaev.

Opinions abound as to why the jury found as it did, especially since they did so much quicker than most people expected.
Continue reading

by

Juries are often criticized in this country when folks don’t like the verdict they deliver. In my experience, though, jurors are not some ignorant bundle of jello-wobbling mindlessly from side to side during the trial, just waiting to pop out a verdict for the side with more money. In my experience, jurors try quite hard to deliver the verdict which rings true to them.

There is not much more we can expect from them.

The jurors in the federal multi-murder matter of convicted Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) are now struggling with grappling a verdict which may be the most difficult of all. It is literally a life or death decision.

Continue reading

by

The Executive Office of Public Safety recently released a report detailing their investigation into 39,000 breath test results. The investigation started when questions arose regarding the calibration of the breathalyzer machines. The report found that in fewer than 150 cases, breath test personnel should have deemed the results to be invalid. Because of human error, the values were found to be outside the acceptable tolerance range set by Massachusetts’ regulations.

Continue reading

by

It was actually a mixed verdict…but will that help 28-year-old Josh Wairi (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) very much?

The former elementary school teacher in the Somerville and Cambridge public school systems has finished his five-day jury trial. He was convicted of federal child pornography charges (to wit: possession and transportation of child pornography). He was also acquitted of three counts of production and attempted production of child pornography.

The former teacher at the Graham and Parks School in Cambridge’s case involved, among other things, videos secretly taken of naked children in a Somerville school locker room.

Prosecutors say the former fifth- and sixth-grade teacher used email to trade and receive images and videos of child pornography, uploaded images and videos of children being sexually exploited and also traded the images with others. The Commonwealth says he had more than 27,000 pictures in his possession
Continue reading

by

When it comes to marijuana, law enforcement has consistently used its odor, unburnt and burnt, as probable cause to search suspected criminals. However, since the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana was decriminalized in 2008, the criminal justice system has had to take a new look at what set of facts Police may use to justify a search and seizure. Whereas before decriminalization, law enforcement could justify a search of a vehicle based solely on the odor of marijuana. Today, if the police pull your vehicle over and smell marijuana, they cannot detain you unless they believe an actual crime is taking place. After 2008, law enforcement could no longer make the inference that marijuana equals criminal activity.

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