by

This Boston criminal lawyer has been around long enough to recognize what may be the tip of an upcoming criminal justice iceberg.

Late last week, three Everett residents were brought in and arraigned on various possession charges. They stand charged with Massachusetts gun and drug charges. Included in the listing of the firearms is allegedly a gun that had been stolen from the Chelsea District Court evidence locker two years ago, according to Middlesex District Attorney Marian T. Ryan’s office.

The arrests took place after the execution of a search warrant at the home shared by Jeffrey Sanon, 30; Liban Ali, 21; and Malensky Oscar, 21, (hereinafter, collectively, the “Defendants”). According to documents, law enforcement was not even looking for the drugs and guns. They were actually on the trail of a laptop that had been taken from a Winchester business. Law enforcement indicates that an anti-theft tracking device installed on the computer indicated it was currently located in the home.

Continue reading

by

A few words of alleged wisdom to our younger readers and those who love them.

School is not quite over yet! Parties are for good times spent with friends! Stabbing people in throwing bricks at them do not qualify as fun times!

They qualify as felonies, such as Massachusetts assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and potentially assault with intent to commit murder.

This past weekend, it would appear that these words were forgotten. It took place in Springfield at a high school graduation party.

Things apparently were fine until some uninvited guests decided to attend. Their attendance included the stabbing of two guests as well as hitting the host in the head with a brick.

You may have thought that this would be enough to get someone in trouble under normal circumstances. You would be correct. However, this was not normal circumstances. This house is owned by a retired Springfield police officer. He has vowed that the culprits would be captured.
Continue reading

by

Today, I bring you a case that I have already told you I feel is “disgustingly unreasonable”. It is a case that takes what I have warned you might happen and shown you that it is already happening. It involves the loss of one of the most basic of Constitutional rights that you rely on every day.

…At your own risk apparently.

Cameron D’Ambrosio is an 18-year-old high school student (hereinafter, the “Song Writer”). Song Writer likes rap music. In fact, he writes and performs his own songs. His latest music video, however, has not only landed him in criminal court, but due to what I can only imagine to be inept lawyering, overzealous (to be generous) prosecuting and a judge who I must assume has let his fear of the press lead him to a shamefully ugly stain on his judicial record has locked him away for awhile.

Like so many rap songs, his songs are said to contain profanity. They also contain images of violence. It is the genre which has not yet been declared illegal. Yet.

Claiming that his recent video contained a “bomb threat”, law enforcement decided, by way of a blatant and reprehensible taking advantage of the recent Boston Marathon Bombing, to perform alittle censoring of their own. They arrested Song Writer and brought him to court.

Once in court, Song Writer pleaded not guilty. Apparently, his defense attorney got that move right. The prosecutor then came up with the brilliant idea of requesting a Dangerousness Hearing in over a week and, in the meantime, holding Song Writer in custody without any right to bail.

According to accounts, the prosecutor did not go into details of the offense in order to justify the outrageous request. She did not have to. She had something better… the consent of the defense attorney!
Continue reading

by

In my last Attorney Sam’s Take I told you I would discuss the other high profile court case taking place on Wednesday. The other matter took place at Boston’s federal court.

That’s right, the Boston Massacre bombing case. However, there is a twist to this posting. One that could have easily involved you or your child.

As you may have heard, three college pals of the surviving bombing suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (hereinafter, “Surviving Bomber”), were charged in a related case. No, there is no allegation that they actually participated in the planning or actual bombing. They are alleged to have helped out afterwards.

As authorities have already announced, this criminal investigation is continuing. Investigators intend to find out brothers Dzhokhar and Tam¬erlan Tsarnaev learned the tricks of the terrorist trade, including constructing bombs.

The fact that such information is freely posted on the internet as well as other places notwithstanding.

Leaving no potential stone unturned, officials arrested Dias Kadyrbayev, Azamat Tazhayakov and Robel Phillipos – all 19 years old and friends of Dzhokhar’s from the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth (hereinafter, collectively, the “Defendants”). Officials further indicate of the investigators that “…there are all kinds of avenues – 
international, domestic – they’re going to go down until there’s no one else to talk to…If these young people (the Defendants) have other information they haven’t shared with law 
enforcement at this point, they would be well advised to cooperate.”
Continue reading

by

Yesterday both Salem and Boston were buzzing with high profile matters. First, let’s discuss Salem and then, later today, Boston.

Salem’s figure of interest was John Burbine, 49, of Wakefield (hereinafter, the “Defendant”). The Defendant stands charged with Massachusetts sexual assault.

Prior to yesterday’s court date, the Defendant was facing criminal charges in Middlesex County for allegedly sexually abusing children at his wife’s day care is facing new allegations in Essex County. Said children, approximately 13 of them, ranged in ages from 8 days to 3 years of age. These assaults are alleged to have happened over a two-year period, beginning in August of 2010.

They are said to have occurred at the Defendant’s wife’s day-care business which was allegedly not duly licensed.

The Defendant’s criminal justice woes did not begin with the Middlesex case, however. In 1989, he was apparently convicted of assaulting a child.

In fact, his wife is currently charged with recklessly endangering children, and the Commonwealth contents that she knew about his prior conviction and allegations that he sexually assaulted young boys in 2005 and 2009. The latter two allegations, by the way, were never prosecuted.

Meanwhile, the Defendant was before the court in Salem yesterday on similar charges, although this time with only one complainant.
Continue reading

by

The Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog has discussed the suggested procedure when law enforcement is upon you and investigating you for a possible crime. I have maintained that the safest practice is to not try to out-run, out-talk or out-fight the investigators. I suggest you invoke your right to an attorney and comply politely with what you are required to do.

After all, you are suspected of committing a crime. That is why it is called a criminal investigation.

The case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) and the issue of his timely receiving Miranda Rights goes to the very heart of this. Think twice before you wish to make exceptions to his Constitutional Rights because he is the villain of the day.

Tomorrow, you may be a suspected villain.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Miranda Rights, Statements And You

When it comes to answering questions of investigating officers, most folks do not understand the ground rules. The investigators do, of course. They utilize them every day for a living. The Miranda Rights do not fully advise the target of those rules either, by the way. It only advises that the rules exist to some extent.

Miranda Rights are necessary in only certain circumstances. They fit here. The Defendant has to be in custody and in that custody because he is the suspect of the crime about which he is being questioned. Both are undeniable here. It cannot, then, fit under any of the exceptions which would otherwise allow law enforcement to delay reading the Rights. The only one here is the public safety exception.
Continue reading

by

Ok, I admit it. Since all the action with the Boston Marathon bombing, Attorney Sam’s Take has been fairly quiet. No, it is not that there have been no further drug, gun or assault arrests in the Commonwealth. It is not even that there was a dearth of things to talk about. And, no, simply because the bombing took place on April 15th, I was not detained by the IRS. There have been other reasons which we might get to some other day.

If I had been writing about the bombing and surviving suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, (hereinafter, the “Defendant”), I would have been warning you about issues that have arisen anyway.

The Defendant’s case is pending in Boston’s Federal District Court. His alleged crimes are federal crimes because of how they were carried out. A simple shooting during the Boston Marathon would likely have been prosecuted in state court. However, when terrorism is involved, not to mention the use of weapons of mass destruction…the federal system steps in.

Any regular reader of this back-to-being daily blog knows how I have ranted about the issues that have arisen the case of James “Whitey” Bulger. It has seemed that the prosecutors, and to some degree the court itself, has handled the matter with different rules than in all other cases. Perhaps it is because of the high level of media coverage Maybe it is because Mr. Bulger seems to personify for many the opposite of presumption of innocence. Whatever the reason, basic tenants which we hold sacred under our Constitution seem to be suspendable in that case.

Enter the case of the Defendant and his deceased brother.

A great deal of media coverage? Absolutely.

High level of public acceptance of immediate guilt? Certainly.

And so, once again, the Constitutional issues have come up in the case as it now is pending in Boston’s federal court.
Continue reading

by

A Norwood man was arrested and charged with the crime of distribution of a class C drug. The drug was nor cocaine, heroin or even marijuana. In fact it is a commonly prescribed medication.

The drug was Adderall.

The description reads like your typical observation sale type of criminal investigation.
Members of the Boston Police District E-5/E-18 Drug Control Unit in the Home Depot parking lot, a known place for drug transactions, according to law enforcement. One vehicle allegedly parked in the farthest spot from the store when there were plenty of other spots closer to the store. soon,
another vehicle came, and one driver got into the other’s vehicle.

Believing they were seeing a drug deal, police approached the vehicle and displayed their badges.

Apparently not regular readers of Attorney Sam’s Take, the pair decided to make statements to the police.

Inconsistent statements.

The man was arrested for the distribution of Adderall and his companion was charged for buying it.

The man and his alleged customer are not the only ones charged in such a scenario. Two other gentlemen were charged for a similar suspected drug deal in Roxbury. This time it was Percocet.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Perscription Drug Prosecution

Perhaps it isn’t a surprise to you that illegal drug transactions can involve prescription drugs. Maybe the fact that law-enforcement actually prosecutes such cases does not surprise you either. However, I find that many people do not realize that the laws regarding these medications is the same as it is with illegal drugs like cocaine, heroin and ecstasy.
Continue reading

by

If you thought that decriminalizing marijuana in Massachusetts would make the use of the drug easier and less complicated…think again.

On the state side, prosecutions for possession of over an ounce or possession with the intent to distribute the stuff continue. As far as federal law enforcement, of course, it is illegal per se.

Of course between having to keep away from marijuana altogether and being able to possess some at will there is a gray area. Comfortably nestled in that gray area is the issue of medical marijuana.

In November, we voted in approval of the legalization of marijuana for debilitating medical conditions including cancer, Parkinson’s disease and AIDS.

The Department of Public Health issued draft regulations last month.

This week, Massachusetts officials will begin to hold hearings around the state to get public input on proposed regulations for medical marijuana.. Three such public hearings will be held Friday at 10 a.m. at the Public Health Department’s headquarters in Boston, Plymouth Memorial Hall in Plymouth and Look Park Garden House in Northampton.

Speakers are asked to provide a copy of their testimony. People can also email testimony to Reg.Testimony@state.ma.

The proposed regulations require operators of marijuana dispensaries to test their products for contaminants and to adopt inventory control measures.

The Public Health Council is scheduled to vote on the regulations May 8th.

Attorney Sam’s Take On The Complexities Of “Legal” Marijuana

Have you ever heard the saying, “water, water, water everywhere… And not a drop to drink?”

The same might now be true for marijuana in Massachusetts. You see, while it may no longer be a crime to posess a certain amount of marijuana, it is illegal for anybody to sell it to you. That would be distribution, together with possession with intent to distribute, and that would be a felony crime.
Continue reading

by

34-year-old Aisling Brady McCarthy (hereinafter, the “Defendant”) is one of the latest Massachusetts assault or murder defendants who are female.

The Defendant is also the second Irish nanny to be charged in Middlesex County in a high-profile murder case involving the death of a baby in her care. Last week, she was indicted on that matter.

Authorities say that a Middlesex County grand jury indicted the Defendant on charges of murder and assault and battery on a child causing bodily injury. They say she’s accused of “violently injuring” the child.

The baby was hospitalized with severe head injuries in January on her first birthday and died two days later. The Defendant had previously pleaded not guilty to assault and battery on a child. At the time, she was jailed on $500,000 bail while authorities awaited the baby’s autopsy results. Apparently, those results are in…along with and indictment to move the matter up to superior court.

Attorney Sam’s Take On Female Defendants

Last week we began the topic of female defendants and the new movement to reach out to young females to prevent such crime. We discussed one young lady who had been arrested for the stabbing of an apparent romantic rival with a butcher knife. We touched upon another 15-year-old girl who had been accused of being part of a mob who beet up an MBTA driver in Dorchester. Yet another such a case involved three girls who attacked a mutual former friend.
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